United States v. Albert Goldstein

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• determining that appellant had consented to the mistrial and accordingly waived his double jeopardy argument when “[d]efendants had moved for a mistrial a scant two hours before one was declared . . . ”
• finding waiver when defendant orally moved for mistrial and failed to withdraw the motion before the judge declared a mistrial
• “Requiring a jury to continue deliberations despite genuine and irreconcilable disagreement more often than not defeats the ends of public justice; not only will such compulsion needlessly waste valuable judicial resources, it may coerce erroneous verdicts.”
• “Requiring a jury to continue deliberations despite genuine and irreconcilable disagreement more often than not defeats the ends of public justice; not only will such compulsion needlessly waste valuable judicial resources, it may coerce erroneous verdicts.”
• “Requiring a jury to continue deliberations despite genuine and irreconcilable disagreement more often than not defeats the ends of public justice; not only will such compulsion needlessly waste valuable judicial resources, it may coerce erroneous verdicts.”
• finding consent when defendants had ample opportunity to rescind their mistrial motion

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).