GARLAND RAY MAPLES, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Garland Ray Maples appeals his conviction for involuntary sexual battery, false imprisonment, kidnapping, and firearm possession, challenging whether a second trial after a mistrial he initially requested violated double jeopardy protections. The court affirmed, holding that Maples' double jeopardy claim was without merit.
The court held that Maples' double jeopardy contention was without merit in the circumstances presented. The court also found no harmful error in the prosecution's reframed question to a doctor-witness regarding the victim's medical history after the court sustained Maples' objection to the initial phrasing.
[1] A defendant who moves for a mistrial and then attempts to withdraw that motion after the court has granted it is not subjected to double jeopardy by a subsequent trial.
[2] A mistrial granted on a defendant's motion removes any double jeopardy bar to a retrial.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“In the circumstances presented, we hold that appellant's contention of double jeopardy is without merit.”
The court's holding rejecting Maples' primary argument that retrial after the mistrial he requested violated double jeopardy.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMaples and Robert Preston Swyers were tried together before a jury. During the first trial, Maples moved for mistrial based on allegedly erroneous and…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Erroneous Jury Instruction cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The appellant, Garland Ray Maples, who was tried together with Robert Preston Swyers before a jury, was convicted of involuntary sexual battery, with sentence of imprisonment for forty years, false imprisonment and kidnapping, with sentence of imprisonment for fifteen years and possession of a firearm while committing a criminal offense, with a sentence of five years, with provision for the sentences to be served concurrently.
The appellant contends he was exposed to double jeopardy, when later tried after the court had granted a mistrial for which the defendant had moved early in the first trial.
When the defendants moved for mistrial on the ground that certain preliminary instructions he had given to the jury were erroneous and prejudicial, the judge announced that the motion would be granted. Thereafter this appellant sought to withdraw his motion for mistrial. The other defendant did not. The judge adhered to the ruling, stating in the record that he had ruled and granted the mistrial on defendant’s motion before the attempt to withdraw the motion. Thereafter the trial was had before another jury, with no prior motion by this appellant for discharge based on a claim of double jeopardy. In the circumstances presented, we hold that appellant’s contention of double jeopardy is without merit.
No harmful error resulted from the prosecution asking a doctor-witness if he believed the history given to him by the victim when he examined her was not true, where the court sustained defendant’s objection thereto, and the question was re-framed by asking the doctor whether in his examination of the victim he found anything in the history given by her was inconsistent.
No reversible error having been made to appear, the judgment and sentences are affirmed.