Supreme Court of Connecticut· 3/17/1992
State v. Buell
Citations
- 221 Conn. 407
- 605 A.2d 539
- 1992 Conn. LEXIS 87
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding that manifest necessity requires an element of surprise, and therefore, when the trial judge had knowledge of the conflict prior to jeopardy attaching, such information cannot later be the basis of a mistrial
- no manifest necessity where conflict had been disclosed to the court and the prosecutor before the jury was sworn
- Manifest necessity “requires an element of surprise; that is, the reason for the declaration of a mistrial arises or be comes known to the court only after the jury has been sworn and jeopardy has attached.”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Borden, Glass
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
9 cases in this archive cite this case.
- State v. CrawfordSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2001-08-28· cited 53×
- State v. BoydSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1992-04-21· cited 37×
- State v. JamesSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1999-02-16· cited 30×
- State v. BrownSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1997-08-12· cited 21×
- State v. KasprzykSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2001-01-09· cited 16×
- State v. AndersonSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2010-03-02· cited 15×
- State v. KruelskiSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1999-08-03· cited 11×
- Davila v. Commissioner of CorrectionConnecticut Appellate Court· 2009-08-04· cited 2×
- State v. MarvelSuperior Court of Delaware· 2017-04-10
Cites
12 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Benton v. MarylandSupreme Court· 1969-06-23· cited 4,063×
- Arizona v. WashingtonSupreme Court· 1978-02-21· cited 2,314×
- United States v. JornSupreme Court· 1971-01-25· cited 2,215×
- United States v. PerezSupreme Court· 1824-03-23· cited 1,814×
- Illinois v. SomervilleSupreme Court· 1973-02-27· cited 1,368×
- Crist v. BretzSupreme Court· 1978-06-14· cited 1,095×
- United States v. Francis Curcio and Gus CurcioSecond Circuit· 1982-05-26· cited 179×
- State v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1987-04-14· cited 74×
- James Walter Cherry v. Director, State Board of CorrectionsFifth Circuit· 1981-01-27· cited 47×
- Roosevelt Grandberry v. Jesse Bonner, Sheriff of Coahoma County, MississippiFifth Circuit· 1981-08-20· cited 42×
- State v. Van SantSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1986-01-21· cited 30×
- State v. RoySupreme Court of Connecticut· 1980-12-02· cited 15×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.