Motion for Mistrial in Texas

What Is a Motion for Mistrial?

Background

“Generally, a mistrial is only required when the improper evidence is ‘clearly calculated to inflame the minds of the jury and is of such a character as to suggest the impossibility of withdrawing the impression produced on the minds of the jury.’” (In re E.O.E. (2016) 508 S.W.3d 613, 624 citing Hinojosa v. State (1999) 4 S.W.3d 240, 253 citing Hernandez v. State (1990) 805 S.W.2d 409, 414.) Otherwise, where the prejudice is curable, an instruction by the court to disregard eliminates the need for a mistrial. (Young v. State (2004) 137 S.W.3d 65, 69.)

How to Structure the Motion

“Only in extreme circumstances, where the prejudice is incurable, will a mistrial be required.” (In re E.O.E. (2016) 508 S.W.3d 613, 624.)

The seminal case setting forth the test for determining whether jury argument is incurable is Standard Fire Ins. Co. v. Reese, 584 S.W.2d 836 (Tex. 1979). In Reese, the court explained: In the case of improper jury argument, the complainant must prove a number of things. He has the burden to prove:

an error,
that was not invited or provoked,
that was preserved by the proper trial predicate, such as an objection, a motion to instruct, or a motion for mistrial, and
was not curable by an instruction, a prompt withdrawal of the statement, or a reprimand by the judge.

(Givens v. Anderson Columbia Co. (2020) No. 04-19-00435-CV, at *9 quoting Standard Fire Ins. Co. v. Reese (1979) 584 S.W.2d 836 at 839-40.)

There are only rare instances of incurable harm from improper argument. (Id.)

The complainant has the further burden to prove:

that the argument by its nature, degree and extent constituted reversibly harmful error. How long the argument continued, whether it was repeated or abandoned and whether there was cumulative error are proper inquiries.
All of the evidence must be closely examined to determine the argument's probable effect on a material finding.
Importantly, a reversal must come from an evaluation of the whole case, which begins with the voir dire and ends with the closing argument. The record may show that the cause is weak, strong, or very close.

(Id.)

From all of these factors, the complainant must show that the probability that the improper argument caused harm is greater than the probability that the verdict was grounded on the proper proceedings and evidence. (Id.)

The Court’s Decision

“[The reviewing court] will not disturb a ruling denying a motion for mistrial absent a showing of an abuse of discretion.” (Bazan v. Munoz (2014) 444 S.W.3d 110, 123.) “A trial court abuses its discretion if it acts without reference to any guiding rules and principles such that the ruling is arbitrary or unreasonable.” (Pressley v. Casar (2019) 567 S.W.3d 327, 333.)

“When reviewing matters committed to the trial court's discretion, a court of appeals may not substitute its own judgment for the trial court's judgment.” (Bowie Mem'l Hosp. v. Wright (2002) 79 S.W.3d 48, 52.) “Stated differently, a trial court does not abuse its discretion merely because it decides a discretionary matter differently than an appellate court would in a similar circumstance.” (In re Estate of Denman (2011) 362 S.W.3d 134, 141.)

Documents for Motion for Mistrial in Texas

Sort By

Zurisadai Martinez VS. Alejandro Guerrero document preview

Motion in Limine, Filed - PLAINTIFF'S

7 pages

Electronically Filed 4/17/2024 1:57 PM Hidalgo County District Clerks 22-0033 Reviewed By: Clarissa Alvarez CAUSE NO. C-4396-22-H ZURISADAI CAMPILLO MARTINEZ § IN TH…