The unwarranted declaration of a mistrial deprived the petitioner of her constitutional rights to a fair trial. The lower courts must assure that a mistrial is truly necessary when the petitioner is ill and all alternatives have been exhausted before declaring a mistrial.

Abuse of process was used in declaring the mistrial. Immediately, while ill, the petitioner said she would testify. The judge said "too late." The jury was not dismissed. The judge ordered the petitioner to jail for $250,000 / $200,000 bail and solitary confinement for five days. Upon returning to court, the judge asked the petitioner to plead guilty eight times. The petitioner said "I can't plead guilty to something I didn't do." The judge said, "There are times when you can and you heard all the testimony that was given at the hearing and the jury may not believe you." The petitioner pled not guilty and was sent back to jail.

This issue is of great legal and national importance for the United States Supreme Court to determine.

The Questions Presented Are:

1. Once the unwarranted mistrial was declared by the judge, did this prohibit the petitioner's right to a fair trial?

2. Did abuse of process in declaring a mistrial bar the petitioner from retrial?

Did the unwarranted declaration of a mistrial deprive the petitioner of her constitutional right to a fair trial?