Honester v. the State
329 Ga. App. 406
| Ga. Ct. App. | 2014Background
- Honester was charged with felony obstruction after a scuffle with police; first jury deadlocked after ~3 hours (11–1 for acquittal).
- Trial judge, after asking jurors for the numerical split (over defense objection) and whether anyone refused to deliberate, refused to give an Allen charge and sua sponte declared a mistrial over defendant’s objection.
- Prosecutor retried Honester five days later before a different jury, which returned a guilty verdict; Honester received the maximum five-year sentence.
- Trial counsel did not file a plea in bar asserting double jeopardy after the mistrial; at an evidentiary hearing counsel admitted he never considered filing one.
- Appellate court found counsel’s failure to move for a plea in bar deficient and that there was a reasonable probability the outcome would differ because the mistrial may not have been justified.
Issues
| Issue | Honester's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial counsel was ineffective for failing to file a plea in bar after a mistrial declared over objection | Counsel’s omission was oversight; a plea in bar would likely have barred retrial because the mistrial lacked manifest necessity | The judge acted within discretion; mistrial was justified and retry permitted | Counsel’s failure was deficient and prejudicial; remand for new trial and opportunity to file plea in bar |
| Whether the sua sponte mistrial was supported by manifest necessity | The mistrial was improper: judge solicited jurors’ vote, failed to consider lesser alternatives, and terminated after short deliberations | Trial court has wide discretion; judge reasonably concluded impasse and avoided coercive pressure on jurors | There was a reasonable probability a reviewing court could find no manifest necessity, making retrial questionable |
Key Cases Cited
- Allen v. United States, 164 U.S. 492 (use and limits of supplemental jury charge)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (ineffective assistance standard)
- Johnson v. State, 256 Ga. App. 730 (manifest necessity and mistrial review)
- Gibson v. State, 272 Ga. 801 (permissible jury inquiry and avoiding disclosure of vote direction)
- Sears v. State, 270 Ga. 834 (trial court not bound by jury's declaration of deadlock)
- McMillan v. State, 253 Ga. 520 (approval of non-coercive Allen charges)
- Henderson v. Hames, 287 Ga. 534 (failure to raise issue may be deficient when oversight is admitted)