Arizona v. Washington
United States Supreme Court
434 U.S. 497 (1978)
In 1971 the defendant was found guilty of murdering a hotel night clerk, and in 1973 the superior court ordered a new trial because the prosecutor had withheld exculpatory evidence from the defense. During the second trial, in 1975, the defense, alluding to the prosecution’s examination of witnesses during voir dire, during which the prosecution said that some of the witnesses to be heard had testified four years earlier, stated that “there was evidence hidden from [the defendant] at the last trial.” The prosecution moved for a mistrial because it thought that the jury would be prejudiced by these comments, and a fair verdict had become impossible. No cautionary instruction given to the jury could guarantee a fair result, the prosecution reasoned. The judge granted the motion but did not find that there was “manifest necessity” for a mistrial. Nor did he expressly state that had found alternative solutions to be inadequate. In a later habeas corpus proceeding, a district court found that the Double Jeopardy Clause protected the defendant from undergoing a second trial.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Stevens, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 174,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.