STATE OF MARYLAND v. KENNETH HART
Court of Appeals, Greene, August 19, 2016,
Mistrial – Absence of Defendant – Court acceptance of partial verdict by jury in absence of Defendant without exploring voluntariness of absence was not “manifest necessity” and barred retrial on deadlocked count

During deliberation, defendant taken to the hospital. Jury foreperson declared the jury hung and met with judge, state, and defense (defendant presence waived). Court denied request to continue deliberation until the next day and accepted partial verdict (3 guilty, 1 hung). Held: guilty verdicts to be retried, hung verdict barred.

Mistrial – Ordinarily mistrial is reviewed for abuse of discretion, but de novo review on appeal where court declares mistrial sua sponte

Waiver – “Where the right of confrontation is not implicated, and where there is involved no other right requiring intelligent and knowing action by the defendant himself for an effective waiver, a defendant will ordinarily be bound by the action or inaction of his attorney”

Right to be Present – The defendant has the right to be present during any communication between the trial judge and the jury relating to the action

Prejudice – “We are unable to say that seeing defense counsel alone at the trial table had
no influence on the verdict of the jury.”
Really? Because they didn’t see that the defendant wasn’t there until they came in to give the verdict… which was written down. So the only influence was the outside chance that they were otherwise going to change their mind despite the oral opinion of the foreperson that they were hopelessly entrenched in their positions.