# Brown v. Brown

> Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · July 6, 1999 · 263 A.D.2d 455

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6039374

## Case

- **Full name:** In the Matter of Mark Brown v. Richard A. Brown
- **Court:** Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
- **Decided:** July 6, 1999
- **Citations:** 263 A.D.2d 455; 691 N.Y.S.2d 907; 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7804
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion of the court
- **Cited by:** 1 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6039374

## Opinion text

—Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to prohibit the respondents from retrying the petitioner under Queens County Indictment No. 176/98 on the ground that retrial would violate his right not to be twice placed in jeopardy for the same offense, and application for leave to prosecute the proceeding as a poor person.
Ordered that the application is granted; and it is further,
Adjudged that the petition is denied and the proceeding is dismissed, without costs or disbursements.
The declaration of a mistrial due to a deadlocked jury is a matter of discretion for the trial court, which is in the best position to determine whether a mistrial is required under the circumstances of the case, and its decision must be accorded great deference (see, Matter of Plummer v Rothwax, 63 NY2d 243 ). The trial court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in declaring a mistrial, as the jury appeared to be genuinely deadlocked and it would have served no purpose to order them to continue to deliberate. Accordingly, there is no bar to a retrial (see, Matter of Plummer v Rothwax, supra; Matter of Martin v Hynes, 259 AD2d 547 ; Matter of Spivack v Brown, 259 AD2d 488 ).
The petitioner’s remaining contention is without merit. Joy, J. P., Krausman, H. Miller and Feuerstein, JJ., concur.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6039374. Public record. Not legal advice.