KENDRICK v. STATE (2025)

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Javares Maurice KENDRICK, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 3D25-1811

Decided: December 10, 2025

Before FERNANDEZ, GORDO and BOKOR, JJ.

Carlos J. Martinez, Public Defender, and Maria E. Lauredo, Chief Assistant Public Defender, for petitioner. James Uthmeier, Attorney General, and Daniel Colmenares, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.

Denied. See Quinones v. State, 766 So. 2d 1165, 1172 n.9 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000) (explaining that a trial court's determination “that mistrial was a manifest necessity deserves great deference,” especially when “the grounds for the mistrial relate to jury prejudice, for the trial judge is in a peculiarly good position to observe the jurors, the witnesses and the attorneys in order to evaluate the extent of the prejudice” (quoting Clark v. State, 756 So. 2d 244, 246 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000))); see also Arizona v. Washington, 434 U.S. 497, 513 (1978) (“[T]he trial judge must have the power to declare a mistrial in appropriate cases. The interest in orderly, impartial procedure would be impaired if he were deterred from exercising that power by a concern that any time a reviewing court disagreed with his assessment of the trial situation a retrial would automatically be barred.”).

PER CURIAM.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network