Walker v. Craven

How courts have described this case

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

• finding implied consent where defendant did not object to mistrial because “[d]efense counsel should have anticipated the possibility of a mistrial and been prepared to object or suggest more acceptable alternatives when the trial judge announced his ruling”
• defendant fails “to object in any way to trial court’s mistrial declaration” and participates in post-trial conferences regarding preparations for re-trial
• “A trial court is [able] to reconsider its intention to declare a mistrial” until “the jury is discharged and has dispersed”
• “[T]he discharge and dispersal of the jury rendered the mistrial a fait accompli.”
• “While the mistrial declaration alone was not a talismanic utterance, the discharge and dispersal of the jury rendered the mistrial a fait accompli. Once the jury is discharged and has dispersed, a trial court is unable to reconsider its intention to declare a mistrial.”
• “While the mistrial declaration alone was not a talismanic utterance, the discharge and dispersal of the jury rendered the mistrial a fait accompli. Once the jury is discharged and has dispersed, a trial court is unable to reconsider its intention to declare a mistrial.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).