Com. v. Pahountis, L., 1555 WDA 2016

Pahountis was charged (2014) with aggravated assault of a child, indecent assault of a child under 13, and endangering the welfare of children for alleged sexual assaults between 2000–2003 of his then-young daughter.
Jury trial occurred September 15–17, 2015; jury began deliberating late afternoon on final day and was intermittently interrupted.
After about four hours of deliberation, the jury sent a note saying it could not reach a unanimous decision and saw no likelihood of agreement with further deliberation.
The trial court questioned the foreperson on the record; the foreperson stated further deliberation would not help and returning the next day would not assist; defense counsel stated they would "yield to the court's decision."
The court declared a mistrial sua sponte; Commonwealth refiled charges and Pahountis moved to dismiss on double jeopardy grounds. The trial court denied the motion; Pahountis appealed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether trial court erred by declaring a mistrial sua sponte (double jeopardy)	Court properly declared mistrial where jury was hopelessly deadlocked	Pahountis: mistrial improper—manifest necessity lacking; court acted late, without trying less drastic alternatives; no consent	Affirmed: no abuse of discretion; jury was deadlocked and manifest necessity existed
Whether appellate court should consider trial court’s December 23, 2016 opinion	Trial court’s later opinion clarified frivolousness and procedure	Pahountis: December 23 opinion was entered after notice of appeal and thus beyond trial court’s jurisdiction; should not be considered	Not considered: opinion filed after appeal divested trial court of jurisdiction; lack of an express frivolous finding means appeal is immediately reviewable

Commonwealth v. Moore, 715 A.2d 448 (Pa. Super. 1998) (order denying double-jeopardy dismissal is immediately appealable absent written frivolousness finding)
Commonwealth v. Brady, 508 A.2d 286 (Pa. 1986) (trial court must make written frivolousness finding to prevent immediate appeal in double-jeopardy dismissal denials)
Commonwealth v. Young, 35 A.3d 54 (Pa. Super. 2011) (genuine inability of jury to agree can constitute manifest necessity for mistrial)
Commonwealth v. Hoover, 460 A.2d 814 (Pa. Super. 1983) (firmness of jury's communication and judge's belief control deadlock inquiry)
Commonwealth v. Greer, 951 A.2d 346 (Pa. 2008) (supplemental jury charges on deadlock are long-sanctioned; caution about coercion)