Sample Case #4

The client was stopped by an officer operating stationary radar on Maryland Rte. 50 southbound for going 75mph in a 55 mph. The officer detected an odor of an alcohol beverage and had the driver exit his car to perform field sobriety tests. Field sobriety tests were conducted and the client did not perform to the officer's satisfaction. At the station, the client refused to submit to the breath test.

Before trial, which was begun around 4:00 p.m. after waiting in court since 8:45 a.m., the judge announced that he had to leave at 5:15 p.m. Both sides indicated that the remaining time should be sufficient with a one police officer trial.

At trial, the prosecutor turned out to be extremely inexperienced and unprepared. He asked numerous leading questions for which objections were sustained by the court.

At 5:15 p.m., as a result of vigorous objectioning by defense counsel, the speed of the client's vehicle had still not made it into evidence. The judge announced he had to leave and the case would be reset on a different day in 1 or 2 months. As the judge was about to leave the courtroom, defense counsel objected to the case being postponed and argued that although resetting the case would technically not violate double jeopardy, that it would violate double jeopardy as a practical matter because the prosecutor would have 1 or 2 months to figure out how to get the speed in evidence. He would get an unfair second chance to prove his case. The court agreed and granted a motion made right then for a judgment of acquittal.