State v. Patrick M.

Summary

The court affirmed the denial of the defendant’s motion to dismiss the murder charge, holding that the prosecutor’s improper comments on the defendant’s post-warning silence did not establish the specific intent required to bar retrial under federal double-jeopardy principles. The court also held that the defendant preserved the claim by moving for a new trial based on the constitutional violation, and that the state constitution does not provide broader protection in this context. The court applied plenary review because the trial court relied on an undisputed documentary record rather than supplemental fact-finding.