U.S. v. Cornelius

Dist. Ct. erred in denying defendant's motion to dismiss on double jeopardy grounds defendant's indictment alleging various drug offenses where said indictment came after mistrial on original drug charges, and where defendant alleged that prosecutor goaded him into seeking mistrial after prosecutor elicited damaging testimony from govt. witness that concerned topic (i.e., identification of defendant as source of cocaine) that Dist. Ct. had previously barred. Dist. Ct. should have held evidentiary hearing to determine intent of prosecutor in asking witness said question where circumstances of case suggested that witness would identify defendant as source of cocaine. Fact that govt. resisted defendant's motion for mistrial did not require finding that govt. was not trying to obtain mistrial.