Illinois v. Somerville
United States Supreme Court
410 U.S. 458 (1973)
After the jury was sworn but before evidence was presented, the state moved for a mistrial because the indictment failed to allege the requisite intent, a defect that would have rendered any conviction vulnerable to reversal; the trial court granted the mistrial over the defendant's objection, and at a second trial the defendant was convicted and sought habeas relief, arguing the second trial violated the Double Jeopardy Clause.
Whether, when a mistrial declaration implements a reasonable state policy and terminates a proceeding that might have ended in a result easily overturned by one of the parties, the defendant's interest in obtaining a verdict from the first jury is outweighed by the equally legitimate demand for public justice.