Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: null and void

Not true. All trial judges have that authority. Been around from the get go. It is just VERY rare.


17 posted on 05/02/2015 4:33:54 PM PDT by RIghtwardHo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]


To: RIghtwardHo; Cboldt

OK. Then I’m wrong here.


19 posted on 05/02/2015 4:41:43 PM PDT by null and void (Is a crunchy spicy tuna roll with eel sauce too much to ask for?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

To: RIghtwardHo
One reason is that in most jurisdictions there are significant qualifications to the judge's ability to do this which make it pretty easy for an appeals court to slap down his NOV.

In PA, the standard is that the evidentiary finding of the jury has to be so bad as to be "shocking to the conscience." I believe in some states there is a requirement that before taking this step the trail judge must review and weigh all evidence in a light most favorable to the prosecution.

Those are both MUCH higher standards than "if this were a bench trial I would have acquitted."

28 posted on 05/02/2015 5:58:39 PM PDT by FredZarguna (On your deathbed you will receive total consciousness. So I got that goin' for me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson