In Coffey v. State, 100 Md. App. 587, 642 A.2d 276 (1984), appellant was convicted of a drug offense, but the conviction was vacated on appeal. 100 Md. App. at 588. Between the first and second trial, both the drugs and the photograph of the drugs, which were entered into evidence at the first trial, were lost by the State. Id. at 595. Witnesses called by the State were required to explain the absence of the evidence. On two separate occasions, police officers gave answers that revealed the fact that appellant previously had been tried for the same crimes for which he presently was being tried. On the second occasion when this occurred, the police officer revealed not only that appellant previously had stood trial, he also revealed that the defendant previously had been convicted. Id. at 594. The Coffey Court said: "We must determine whether in a criminal case, where a defendant is retried on the same charges, does an experienced police officer's mention of the defendant's previous trial and conviction for the same charges ordinarily warrant a mistrial." Id. at 598. In Coffey, the Court held that the trial court erred in failing to grant appellant's motion for a mistrial. Id. at 606. In doing so, the Court focused upon the prejudicial effect of the disclosure of a prior conviction - not upon the disclosure that appellant previously had been tried for the same offense.