State v. Christopher Forlasto

Syllabus

The defendant, Christopher Forlasto, appealed the denial of his motion to dismiss one count of first-degree sexual assault, following a mistrial on this count. The defendant argued that his motion to dismiss was based on double jeopardy grounds, which allowed for an interlocutory review. He contended that the trial justice's in limine ruling allowing the state to admit evidence of defendant's acquitted conduct at the retrial would place him in double jeopardy and also that the prosecutor acted to intentionally cause a mistrial at the first trial. The defendant also asserted that the trial justice erred in preliminarily excluding certain photographic evidence and in granting the state's motion to admit evidence of his simple assault conviction from the first trial. The Supreme Court first held that the trial justice's pretrial evidentiary rulings admitting defendant's acquitted conduct into evidence at retrial, excluding certain photographic evidence, and admitting evidence of defendant's simple assault, were not appropriate for interlocutory review and, therefore, were not properly before the Court. Next, the Court held that defendant had waived his double jeopardy argument based on prosecutorial misconduct by not seeking a mistrial before the trial justice, and that none of the three distinct abuses protected by his constitutional right to be free from double jeopardy were present in this case. Accordingly, the Supreme Court affirmed the order of the Superior Court.