Rule 605. Mistrial.

 (A)  Motions to withdraw a juror are abolished.

 (B)  When an event prejudicial to the defendant occurs during trial only the defendant may move for a mistrial; the motion shall be made when the event is disclosed. Otherwise, the trial judge may declare a mistrial only for reasons of manifest necessity.

Comment

   This rule replaces the practice of moving for the withdrawal of a juror.

   Examples of ‘‘manifest necessity’’ can be found in Commonwealth v. Stewart, 317 A.2d 616 (Pa. 1974); Commonwealth v. Brown, 301 A.2d 876 (Pa. 1973); United States ex rel. Russo v. Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Passaic County, 483 F.2d 7 (3rd Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 414 U. S. 1023 (1973; United States v. Tinney, 473 F.2d 1085 (3rd Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 412 U. S. 928 (1973); United States v. Jorn, 440 U. S. 470 (1971); and United States v. Perez, 9 Wheat. 579 (1824); see also Illinois v. Somerville, 410 U. S. 458 (1973).

   Official Note

   Rule 1118 adopted January 24, 1968, effective August 1, 1968; amended June 28, 1974, effective September 1, 1974; renumbered Rule 605 and amended March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001.

   Committee Explanatory Reports:

   Final Report explaining the March 1, 2000 reorganization and renumbering of the rules published with the Court’s Order at 30 Pa.B. 1477 (March 18, 2000).



No part of the information on this site may be reproduced for profit or sold for profit.

This material has been drawn directly from the official Pennsylvania Code full text database. Due to the limitations of HTML or differences in display capabilities of different browsers, this version may differ slightly from the official printed version.