State v. Combs
297 Neb. 422
| Neb. | 2017Background
- Patrick J. Combs was tried on four charges related to alleged financial misconduct; after a multi-day jury deliberation the jury reported being deadlocked and the court declared a mistrial at Combs’ renewed request.
- After the mistrial, Combs learned (via the presiding juror’s affidavit and juror emails) that during deliberations the jury had reportedly voted unanimously to acquit on three counts and was 11–1 to acquit on the fourth.
- The jury never completed or announced a verdict in open court, the verdict form was not filled out or accepted, and no polling occurred.
- Combs moved for judgment of acquittal and then filed a plea in bar arguing double jeopardy barred retrial on the three counts the jury had allegedly unanimously voted to acquit.
- The district court overruled both the post-mistrial judgment of acquittal motion and the plea in bar; Combs appealed only the plea-in-bar ruling (the overruling is a final, appealable order).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Combs) | Defendant's Argument (State) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether retrial on counts 2–4 is barred by Double Jeopardy after a mistrial requested by defendant | Jury had in fact unanimously acquitted on counts 2–4 during deliberations, so retrial is barred | No verdict was rendered in open court; votes in deliberation are not verdicts; retrial allowed where mistrial was defendant-requested | Held for State: Double Jeopardy does not bar retrial because no verdict was rendered and mistrial was granted at Combs’ request |
| Whether post-mistrial motion for judgment of acquittal was timely | The acquittal should be recognized post-mistrial based on juror evidence | Motion for judgment of acquittal is untimely after a mistrial; directed-verdict motion cannot be made once trial ended | Motion was untimely and properly overruled |
| Whether overruling earlier motions to dismiss / directed verdicts is reviewable now | Trial-court denial of dismissal/judgment of acquittal was error and appealable | Those interlocutory orders are not final and Combs waived review by proceeding and presenting evidence | Not reviewable on this appeal (no final judgment); waiver applies |
| Whether juror statements/affidavits showing deliberative votes can bar retrial | Juror affidavit establishes acquittals; court should have inquired before granting mistrial | Jury deliberation votes are not verdicts; verdict must be rendered in open court and accepted | Court correctly concluded juror deliberation votes do not constitute final verdicts; retrial permitted |
Key Cases Cited
- Arizona v. Washington, 434 U.S. 497 (1978) (explains manifest necessity standard when mistrial declared over defendant’s objection)
- Oregon v. Kennedy, 456 U.S. 667 (1982) (holds that when defendant requests mistrial, retrial is generally permitted unless prosecutor intended to provoke mistrial)
- Benton v. Maryland, 395 U.S. 784 (1969) (applies Double Jeopardy Clause to the states via 14th Amendment)
- State v. Williams, 278 Neb. 841 (Neb. 2009) (plea in bar is proper vehicle to raise nonfrivolous double jeopardy claims; overruling is final, appealable)
- State v. Anderson, 193 Neb. 467 (Neb. 1974) (a jury’s action is not a verdict until rendered in open court and accepted by the judge)
- Longfellow v. The State, 10 Neb. 105 (Neb. 1880) (verdict must be delivered in open court to have validity)