Martinez v. Caldwell
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 12070
5th Cir.2011Background
- Martinez was tried for second-degree murder in 2002; the jury deadlocked 9–3 in favor of acquittal after a three-week trial; Judge Best declared a mistrial after a sidebar where the jury’s direction was not disclosed to the parties; Best knew the direction but did not reveal it; Martinez sought to prevent retrial under double jeopardy and was later allowed to seek federal habeas relief; Judge Winsberg found Best’s conduct improper and the Louisiana First Circuit held Kennedy required a deliberate act by the court to provoke a mistrial; the district court granted Martinez’s §2241 petition, but the Fifth Circuit vacated and denied relief.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether §2241 review is de novo rather than AEDPA deference. | Martinez: §2241 requires de novo review. | State: apply AEDPA deference. | De novo review applicable; AEDPA deferential standard does not apply. |
| Whether Judge Best deliberately goaded the mistrial by withholding the vote direction. | Martinez: Best acted with bad faith to provoke mistrial. | State: no intentional goading; actions were not done to provoke. | District court erred; no sufficient showing of intentional goading. |
| Whether the district court’s Kennedy-based analysis was correct. | Martinez: Kennedy supports retrial only upon deliberate/goading conduct. | State: Kennedy limits do not bar retrial here. | Martinez’s petition denied; Kennedy not satisfied. |
Key Cases Cited
- Kennedy v. Kentucky, 456 U.S. 667 (1982) (require deliberate, intentional act to provoke mistrial for bar to retrial)
- United States v. Dinitz, 424 U.S. 600 (1976) (bad faith or harassment required for bar to retrial; not mere misconduct)
- Wharton v. United States, 320 F.3d 526 (5th Cir. 2003) (standard for goading into mistrial by government actors)
- Wade v. Hunter, 336 U.S. 684 (1949) (right to complete trial by the first trier of fact)
- United States v. Scott, 437 U.S. 82 (1978) (right to be tried by the jury first impaneled; manifest necessity rules)
- Hill v. Johnson, 210 F.3d 481 (5th Cir. 2000) (deference standards in §2254 matters; context for review)