Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Warger v. Shauers, 574 U.S. 40 (2014), was a unanimous decision by the United States Supreme Court, ruling that jurors may not testify about what occurred during jury deliberations, even to expose dishonesty during jury selection or voir dire. [1] The Court delivered its ruling on December 9, 2014. [2]
Strike for cause (also referred to as challenge for cause or removal for cause) is a method of eliminating potential members from a jury panel in the United States.. During the jury selection process, after voir dire, opposing attorneys may request removal of any juror who does not appear capable of rendering a fair and impartial verdict, in either determining guilt or innocence and/or a ...
(b) Where however the prosecution evidence is such that its strength or weakness depends on the view to be taken of a witness's reliability or other matters which are generally speaking within the province of the jury and where on one possible view of the facts there is evidence upon which a jury could properly come to the conclusion that the defendant is guilty, then the judge should allow ...
In the 1794 case Georgia v.Brailsford, the Supreme Court directly tried a common law case before a jury.The facts in the case were not in dispute, and the legal opinion of the court was unanimous, but the Court was nonetheless obligated under the Seventh Amendment to refer the matter to the jury for a general verdict.
The district attorney urged New York Judge Juan Merchan to reject Trump's request to throw out the jury's verdict and dismiss the case on the grounds of presidential immunity, arguing the request ...
As common law provided, the judge could set aside (or nullify) a jury verdict when the judge decided the verdict was contrary to the evidence or the law. Common law precluded the judge from himself entering a verdict; a new trial, with a new jury, was the only course permissible. In Slocum v.
Around 11:30 a.m. Monday, the jury told the judge they reached a unanimous verdict on the second count in the case. The more serious charge of second-degree manslaughter was dismissed Friday after ...
A "motion for judgment n.o.v." (non obstante veredicto, or notwithstanding the verdict) asks the court to reverse the jury's verdict on the grounds that the jury could not reasonably have reached such a verdict. This motion is made after the jury's verdict. If granted, the court enters a new verdict. This motion can be used in a criminal case ...