United States v. Dinitz

Background

Nathan Dinitz was charged with conspiracy and distribution of LSD and went to trial after hiring two lawyers shortly before trial. One lawyer, Maurice Wagner, made repeated improper statements during opening argument and raised an unproven extortion story. The judge excluded Wagner and asked the remaining attorney to proceed. The defendant then asked for a mistrial so he could obtain other counsel; the prosecutor did not oppose and the judge declared a mistrial. At a second trial the defendant represented himself and was convicted; the Court of Appeals reversed on double jeopardy grounds.

Reasoning

The Court addressed whether retrying Dinitz violated the protection against being tried twice for the same charge. It explained that when a defendant requests a mistrial, retrial is normally allowed because the defendant controls that choice, unless the judge or prosecutor acted in bad faith to provoke the mistrial. The Court found no evidence of such bad faith in removing the lawyer and rejected the appeals court’s stricter approach, holding the retrial was permissible.

Real world impact

The decision clarifies that defendants who request mistrials can generally be retried unless there is proof that the judge or prosecutor deliberately caused the mistrial. It also affirms a trial judge’s authority to remove misbehaving counsel and affects how courts, defense lawyers, and prosecutors handle courtroom misconduct and mistrial requests.

Dissents or concurrances

Chief Justice Burger concurred, emphasizing judges’ control over counsel; Justice Brennan (with Justice Marshall) dissented, arguing the judge’s actions deprived the defendant of a real choice and would bar retrial.