Oregon v. Kennedy

Facts

Respondent was charged with the theft of an oriental rug. During his first trial, the State called an expert witness on the subject of Middle Eastern rugs to testify as to the value and the identity of the rug in question. On cross-examination, respondent’s attorney attempted to establish bias on the part of the expert witness. The trial court then granted respondent’s motion for a mistrial. When the State later sought to retry respondent, he moved to dismiss the charges because of double jeopardy. After a hearing at which the prosecutor testified, the trial court found as a fact that it was not the intention of the prosecutor in this case to cause a mistrial. On the basis of this, the trial court held that double jeopardy principles did not bar retrial, and respondent was then tried and convicted. Respondent then appealed to the Oregon Court of Appeals, which sustained his double jeopardy claim. The Court of Appeals accepted the trial court’s finding that it was not the intent of the prosecutor to cause a mistrial. Nevertheless, the court held that retrial was barred because the prosecutor’s conduct constituted what it viewed as overreaching.