U.S. v. Harris, 51 M.J. 191

Core Criminal Law Subjects: Evidence: Instructions on

1. the military judge corrected error from improper evidence of threats by accused; such evidence was never admitted as proper “other acts” evidence, and the military judge instructed the members to disregard the comments about threats as hearsay which denied accused the opportunity to confront the threats

Trial Stages: Merits: Mistrial

1. a mistrial may be declared in the discretion of the military judge when such action is manifestly necessary in the interests of justice because of circumstances arising during the proceedings which case substantial doubt upon the fairness of the proceedings; mistrial is a drastic remedy which should be used only when necessary to prevent a miscarriage of justice
2. military judge should examine numerous factors in deciding whether to grant a mistrial, including: timing of the incident leading to the question of mistrial; the identity of the factfinder; the reasons for a mistrial; potential alternative remedies such as instructions; and, most importantly, the desires of and the impact on the defendant
3. military judge did not abuse his discretion in not granting mistrial sua sponte where he ultimately determined he could rely on limiting and cautionary instructions, as well as closing instructions; such instructions, along with the presumption that the members followed those instructions, eliminated the risk of harm from improper credibility evidence

Trial Stages: Appeals: Standards of Review, Burdens, etc.

1. military judge’s determination on a request for mistrial, or on his own sua sponte consideration of a mistrial, will not be reversed absent clear evidence of abuse of discretion