Summary
The Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed the district court’s judgment upholding the county court’s denial of Dawnelle C. Todd’s plea in bar. The court held that although the ultimate double-jeopardy issue presented by the plea in bar is a question of law, the trial court’s determination that manifest necessity supported a mistrial is reviewed for abuse of discretion. The court concluded that the record sufficiently justified the mistrial and therefore did not bar retrial.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the district court applied the proper standards of review when affirming the county court's denial of Todd's plea in bar.
- Whether the county court abused its discretion by declaring a mistrial based on manifest necessity after repeated violations of its order in limine.
- Whether a retrial was barred by the Double Jeopardy Clauses after the mistrial was declared over Todd's objection without an express contemporaneous finding of manifest necessity.
Holdings
- Although the ultimate ruling on a plea in bar asserting double jeopardy is a question of law reviewed independently, the trial court's determination that manifest necessity required a mistrial is reviewed for abuse of discretion.
- Double jeopardy does not bar retrial when the State demonstrates manifest necessity for a mistrial declared over the defendant's objection.
- The county court did not abuse its discretion in finding manifest necessity for the mistrial, and the district court correctly concluded that double jeopardy did not bar retrial.
Key quotations
“A mistrial does not automatically terminate jeopardy, because “‘a trial can be discontinued when particular circumstances manifest a necessity for doing so, and when failure to discontinue would defeat the ends of justice.’”” (432-433)
“Double jeopardy does not arise if the State can demonstrate manifest necessity for a mistrial declared over the objection of the defendant.” (433)
“The county court declared a mistrial because it determined that defense counsel had repeatedly attempted to present evidence to the jury in violation of the court’s order in limine.” (438)
“It logically follows that the district court did not err when it concluded that the county court had articulated a manifest necessity to declare a mistrial and that therefore, double jeopardy did not bar a retrial.” (439)
Factual background
A police officer stopped Dawnelle Todd after observing her fail to stop at a sign and drive on a painted median. Todd showed signs of intoxication, failed a preliminary breath test, and had a chemical breath-test result of .132 blood alcohol content. Before and during trial, Todd sought to present a choice-of-evils defense based on her belief that she had awakened partially undressed and disoriented in her vehicle and needed to drive away from a potentially dangerous situation. After repeated efforts by defense counsel and Todd to present the barred justification theory, the county court declared a mistrial over Todd's objection.
Procedural history
The Dodge County Court charged Todd with driving under the influence, sustained the State's motion in limine barring a choice-of-evils defense, and declared a mistrial after repeated attempts to present the barred defense. The county court denied Todd's plea in bar, concluding that the record demonstrated manifest necessity for the mistrial. The Dodge County District Court affirmed, and the Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed the district court.