Hung Jury vs. Mistrial: What Happens When a Jury Can't Decide

When a judge says the case is “going to the jury,” it sounds like a handoff — and in a real sense, it is. The trial phase ends, and the decision phase begins. But before jurors ever set foot in the deliberation room, there is one final, critical step: jury instructions.

The terms that follow are related, but not interchangeable. A hung jury is a jury that cannot reach the agreement required for a verdict. A mistrial is a trial the judge ends without a valid verdict. A hung jury can cause a mistrial, but serious procedural error, prejudicial misconduct, or an emergency can cause one too. Because a mistrial is not an acquittal, a retrial is often possible.

The Moment the Case Goes to the Jury

The judge reads the jury a set of legal instructions — sometimes called a “charge” — that explains exactly what the law requires for a conviction. These instructions define the elements of each charge, clarify the standard of proof (beyond a reasonable doubt), and tell jurors how to evaluate the evidence they’ve seen. In complex cases, these instructions can run dozens of pages. Jurors are typically given a written copy to take into the room with them.

The courtroom glossary defines the legal terms that often appear in jury instructions and verdict reporting without plain-language context.

Once instructions are complete, the jury is escorted to the deliberation room — a private space, usually adjacent to the courtroom, where no one else is permitted. The first order of business is selecting a foreperson. In some jurisdictions, the foreperson is chosen by the judge or assigned by seniority; in most, jurors elect one among themselves. The foreperson’s role is practical: they guide discussion, keep deliberations on track, manage the flow of conversation, and sign and deliver the final verdict form.

From that point forward, the jury is on its own.

What Jurors Can and Can’t Do — and Why Notes to the Judge Are Normal

The deliberation room is governed by strict rules, most of which exist to protect the integrity of the process.

What jurors can do:

• Review all physical evidence admitted at trial — documents, photographs, objects (a completed-case example shows how a murder trial is built from evidence before the record is handed to jurors for a final decision)
• Request that portions of trial testimony be read back to them by the court reporter
• Ask the judge written questions about the law or the instructions
• Discuss the case freely among themselves
• Change their minds as many times as they need to

What jurors cannot do:

• Conduct independent research of any kind — no internet searches, no visiting the crime scene, no consulting outside experts
• Discuss the case with anyone outside the jury room, including family members
• Consider evidence that was excluded or objections that were sustained
• Base their decision on anything other than what was presented in court

When jurors have a question — about a legal term, about what a specific instruction means, about whether they can request a particular piece of evidence — they write a note to the judge. This is called a jury communication or jury note, and it is entirely routine. The judge receives the note, consults with both attorneys, and sends back a written response. Sometimes the answer is a clarification; sometimes it is simply a reminder to rely on their collective memory of the testimony.

These notes are not a sign of confusion or trouble. They are the system working as designed. Jurors are not lawyers, and the law is genuinely complex. A jury that asks questions is a jury that is taking its responsibility seriously.

Hung Jury vs. Mistrial: The Difference

A deadlocked jury — sometimes called a “hung jury” — occurs when jurors cannot reach the unanimous agreement required for a verdict. (A small number of states allow non-unanimous verdicts in certain cases, but federal criminal trials and most state murder trials require unanimity.)

When a jury reports that it is deadlocked, the judge does not simply declare a mistrial. The standard response is to give what is known as an Allen charge — sometimes called a “dynamite charge” — a set of instructions urging jurors to make a genuine effort to reach agreement. The Allen charge reminds jurors that they should listen to one another, reconsider their positions in light of the group’s reasoning, and not hold out simply for the sake of holding out. It does not tell anyone to abandon their honest convictions.

If deliberations continue and the jury remains deadlocked, the judge will eventually declare a mistrial.

A hung jury is only one route to a mistrial. A judge may also end a trial after a serious procedural error, prejudicial misconduct by an attorney, juror, or witness, or an emergency that makes a fair trial impossible. The common thread is not juror disagreement; it is that the proceeding can no longer produce a valid, fair verdict.

Here is what a hung-jury mistrial means — and what it does not:

• A mistrial is not an acquittal. The defendant is not found not guilty. No verdict has been reached.
• A hung-jury mistrial usually does not bar retrial. The prosecution can — and often does — try the case again. Other mistrial circumstances can raise more complicated double-jeopardy questions, especially when the prosecution sought or caused the mistrial, so the exact result depends on the record and jurisdiction.
• A mistrial is, in practical terms, a reset. The case returns to the starting line. Whether the prosecution chooses to retry depends on the strength of the evidence, the resources available, and the interests of the victim’s family and the public.
• An acquittal is different. A valid not-guilty verdict is final for that charge; the prosecution cannot simply start over because it dislikes the result.

For families of victims, a mistrial is one of the most painful outcomes imaginable — not because justice was denied forever, but because the wait continues.

Why Long Deliberations Don’t Predict the Verdict — and Three Honest Ways to Wait

Start with How to Read a Case Like the Court Does before treating any jury note, delay, or courtroom rumor as proof of where a verdict is heading.

One of the most persistent myths about jury deliberations is that the length of time tells you something about the outcome. It does not — at least not reliably.

Long deliberations can mean many things: a complex case with voluminous evidence, a single holdout juror, a jury that is methodical and thorough, a foreperson who insists on working through every charge individually, or simply a group of twelve people who take their time because they understand the weight of what they are deciding. Short deliberations can reflect clarity — or they can reflect a jury that reached consensus quickly on a straightforward case.

Analysts, commentators, and true crime followers have spent decades trying to read deliberation length as a signal. There is no reliable pattern. Verdicts of every kind — guilty, not guilty, hung — have come after both short and long deliberations.

If you are following a case and waiting for a verdict, here are three honest ways to do it:

1. Follow the court record, not the commentary. Jury notes, scheduling updates, and official court communications are factual. Cable news panels and social media speculation are not. The former tells you what is actually happening; the latter tells you what people wish were happening.

2. Understand that your emotional investment is valid — and separate from the outcome. If you care about a case, especially a victim-centered case, the wait is genuinely hard. That feeling is real. But it is worth separating your emotional experience from your predictions. The jury does not know what you know about the victim. They know only what was admitted into evidence.

3. Prepare for any outcome. Verdicts that feel wrong — in either direction — are part of the system. The standard of proof is high by design. Reasonable doubt is a feature, not a flaw. Understanding the process in advance makes the outcome, whatever it is, easier to absorb with clarity rather than shock.

The jury room is one of the few places left in public life where ordinary people are asked to do something genuinely consequential — and to do it together, in private, without an audience. That process deserves patience and respect, even when the waiting is hard.

The verified court calendar tracks proceedings we cover, while this guide explains the deliberation stage once a listed trial reaches the jury.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is a hung jury the same as a mistrial?

No. A hung jury describes jurors who cannot reach the agreement required for a verdict. A mistrial describes the legal result when a judge ends a trial without a valid verdict. A hung jury can lead to a mistrial, but it is not the only possible cause.

Can prosecutors retry a case after a hung jury?

Usually, yes. A hung-jury mistrial produces no acquittal, so prosecutors may retry the charge, negotiate a plea, or decline to proceed. The precise rule can depend on the jurisdiction and what caused the mistrial.

Does a long deliberation mean the jury will acquit?

No. Deliberation length does not reliably predict a guilty verdict, an acquittal, or a deadlock. It may reflect complex evidence, multiple charges, careful review, or disagreement among jurors.

What is an Allen charge?

An Allen charge is a supplemental instruction that asks deadlocked jurors to keep deliberating, listen to one another, and reconsider their views without abandoning an honestly held conviction.

Cassian Creed publishes victim-first true crime at cassiancreed.com.