Klande (D) and others were indicted for conspiring to import and distribute marijuana. At trial, the marijuana involved was not available, so the prosecution intended to have a demonstration on how a drug-sniffing dog detected the marijuana. A newspaper article was published and included comments by the judge, the government prosecutor, and one of the defense counsels. D moved for a mistrial because the prosecutor had attested to the dog's reliability. The district court granted the mistrial. D then moved to have the indictment dismissed on double jeopardy grounds. The motion was denied. D appealed; the mistrial was a sua sponte declaration by the district court which barred reprosecution.