667 results for 'cat:"Jury"'.
J. Waldick finds the trial court properly admitted the victims' 911 calls into evidence at defendant's trial on attempted murder and assault charges. The calls were made while defendant attempted to break into the victims' home and immediately after he had assaulted his girlfriend, one of the victims; therefore, the calls were admissible under the present sense impression hearsay exception. Meanwhile, the trial court properly allowed the prosecution to provide details about defendant's prior conviction for attempted murder because the facts of the previous case were similar and established relevance, while the state did not include any prejudicial or inflammatory details likely to influence the jury. Affirmed.
Court: Ohio Court Of Appeals, Judge: Waldick, Filed On: April 22, 2024, Case #: 2024-Ohio-1534, Categories: Evidence, jury, Assault
J. Bivins denies a trucking company and its truck driver’s motion for partial summary judgment in this personal injury lawsuit after the truck driver was using his cell phone and rear-ended a driver and his passenger on the interstate. The driver and passenger allege that the truck driver did admit to using the cell phone while speeding. A reasonable jury could decide the truck driver’s behavior was inherently reckless because he took his eyes off the interstate.
Court: USDC Southern District of Alabama, Judge: Bivins, Filed On: April 22, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv125, NOS: Motor Vehicle - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: jury, Vehicle, Negligence
Per curiam, the Texas Supreme Court finds that the court of appeals improperly ruled in favor of a truck driver who sued the owners of three companies that manage the trucking operation after he was injured falling asleep behind the wheel and crashing. There is a lack of evidence to show that the truck driver was an employee of one of the owners. Furthermore, the trial court incorrectly used a pattern jury charge to define "employee," rather than a federal definition. Reversed.
Court: Texas Supreme Court, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: April 19, 2024, Case #: 21-0853, Categories: Employment, jury
J. Winkler finds the trial court properly granted the prosecution's request to dismiss a black juror during voir dire during defendant's murder trial. Although he was one of only two black individuals on the jury, comments made about flaws in the criminal justice system gave the prosecution a race-neutral justification for the use of a peremptory challenge. Meanwhile, even though the court erroneously admitted a detective's testimony about an interview with the owner of the barber shop where the shooting took place, the error was harmless because the specific evidence about who was in the shop at the time of the murder was established through other witness testimony. Affirmed.
Court: Ohio Court Of Appeals, Judge: Winkler, Filed On: April 19, 2024, Case #: 2024-Ohio-1491, Categories: Confrontation, jury, Murder
J. Matheson finds that the lower court properly convicted defendant of attempted enticement of a minor. Defendant claims there was not enough evidence to convict him and that the lower court improperly gave jury instructions related to "grooming." Even if the grooming instruction was removed, the jury still had enough evidence from which to find that defendant was attempting to entice a minor through graphic conversations and making travel arrangements to meet them. Affirmed.
Court: 10th Circuit, Judge: Matheson, Filed On: April 19, 2024, Case #: 22-5088, Categories: Child Victims, jury Instructions
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Stargel finds that defendant was improperly convicted of murder because the jury had been given confusing instructions as to the law of self-defense, and the instructions were not corrected during trial. There was enough evidence to support the defendant’s self-defense theory and the court should have given the requested portion of jury instruction on deadly force. Therefore, this case is remanded for a new trial. Reversed.
Court: Florida Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Stargel, Filed On: April 19, 2024, Case #: 6D23-509, Categories: Evidence, jury, Self Defense
J. Lagoa finds that the district court properly ruled in favor of the sheriff and deputy in a civil rights action brought by the widower arising after the deputy fatally shot his wife while responding to a 911 call about her suicide attempt. The district court correctly instructed the jury on excessive force and the Baker Act. The modified pattern instructions on excessive force were properly tailored to the scenario the deputy encountered, which did not involve a criminal arrest, and designed to avoid needlessly confusing the jury. Although the Baker Act instruction was incorrect, the error was not prejudicial. The evidence allowed the jury to find that the deputy was justified in determining that the wife could not decide for herself whether a voluntary examination was necessary. The intoxicated wife was holding a knife and told the deputy to shoot her. Affirmed.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Lagoa, Filed On: April 18, 2024, Case #: 22-11106, Categories: Civil Rights, jury, Police Misconduct
J. Yu finds that the lower court properly denied defendant's request for a new trial stemming from his child molestation conviction. Defendant claims that he is entitled to a new trial because his legal team did not propose a lesser included offense instruction for fourth-degree assault. Even if his counsel had requested the lesser instructions, they still would have been denied because there was no evidence on the record to support them. Affirmed.
Court: Washington Supreme Court, Judge: Yu, Filed On: April 18, 2024, Case #: 100953-4, Categories: Assault, Child Victims, jury Instructions
J. Kamins finds that certain prosecutor statements during closing arguments improperly shifted the burden of proof to the defense. “Prosecutor’s statements that defendant could have but did not cross-examine [the victim] or her friend suggested to the jury that defendant had the burden to prove that his version of the events was true.” Reversed.
Court: Oregon Court of Appeals, Judge: Kamins, Filed On: April 17, 2024, Case #: A179175, Categories: jury, Prosecutorial Misconduct, Sex Offender
J. Savoie finds that defendant was properly convicted for the first-degree murder of his wife, the attempted first-degree murder of his stepdaughter, and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. Defendant argues that the trial court wrongfully denied his motion for a new trial on the basis that defective jury summonses did not implement Act 121, which allows convicted felons to serve on juries under certain circumstances. Defendant did not timely challenge his jury venire because he did not file a motion to quash before trial, thus waiving his objection. Affirmed.
Court: Louisiana Court Of Appeal, Judge: Savoie, Filed On: April 17, 2024, Case #: KA-23-616, Categories: jury, Murder
J. Schlegel finds that defendant was properly convicted of domestic abuse battery by strangulation. Defendant does not show that a juror should have been disqualified from serving for not disclosing a prior felony. In this case, the juror admitted that he had been convicted of possession of methamphetamine in 2010, but he thought he had received “a pardon when [he]was taken off of probation." However, defendant's sentence as enhanced by the multiple offender bill is illegally lenient for not restricting parole. Affirmed in part.
Court: Louisiana Court Of Appeal, Judge: Schlegel, Filed On: April 17, 2024, Case #: 23-KA-393, Categories: jury, Sentencing, Domestic Violence
J. Hood finds the district court improperly excluded portions of a video to the jury that shows the defendant refusing to test for suspicion of DUI. This error influences the fairness of the trial, and most likely the jury’s verdict. The defendant has since died, but the portion of the opinion on the administrative definition of “refusal” is remanded for a new trial. Affirmed in part. Reversed in part.
Court: Colorado Supreme Court, Judge: Hood, Filed On: April 15, 2024, Case #: 2024CO20, Categories: Evidence, jury, Dui
J. Stevens affirms the trial court’s defendant's guilty plea conviction for murder and jury-imposed life sentence. The trial judge properly denied defendant’s request for a change of venue. He unsuccessfully argued he could not get a fair trial in the small county, citing comments by 95 people on earlier Facebook posts by the parents of the victim. Affirmed.
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, Judge: Stevens, Filed On: April 12, 2024, Case #: 06-23-142, Categories: jury, Murder, Sentencing
J. Baker finds the trial court properly convicted defendant for murder. Defendant was taken into custody after having been identified as a suspect. She was found with the murder weapon, Mirandized and admitted she had been in an argument with the victim because he had allegedly struck her 14-year-old son. Sufficient evidence, including surveillance video and clothing worn by the assailant in the video found at defendant's home, support the conviction. Though it was later found a juror's sister worked for the defense attorney, no evidence shows the juror and attorney knew each other. Affirmed.
Court: Arkansas Supreme Court, Judge: Baker , Filed On: April 11, 2024, Case #: CR-23-602, Categories: Evidence, jury, Murder
Per curiam, the court vacates this settlement agreement that a jury decided in favor of the former employee for more than $1.5 million after he was wrongfully terminated from the county. The employee argued that, as a serviceman, his Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act claims should be litigated, but that the settlement agreement had been presented as a “take it or leave it.” The case is remanded so a jury can determine whether the settlement agreement outweighs the Act. Vacated.
Court: 6th Circuit, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: April 11, 2024, Case #: 22-6054, Categories: Employment, jury, Settlements
Per curiam, the circuit finds the district court properly struck the black citizens from the jury pool. Though a jury pool member says he was the only one asked if he knew the black defendant, he cannot show the prosecutors dismissed him solely for racial reasons. No constitutional violation is shown. Affirmed.
Court: 5th Circuit, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: April 11, 2024, Case #: 22-30687, Categories: Constitution, jury
J. Wilkinson finds the lower court properly convicted the defendant of various crimes related to drug trafficking, including two counts of possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime. While executing a search warrant of the defendant's apartment, police found a noteworthy collection of drugs and drug paraphernalia: copious quantities of heroin, cocaine and marijuana, in addition to packaging supplies, cutting materials, scales, sifters and blending equipment to go along with six firearms. The defendant disputes a section of jury instructions on the firearm charges, claiming the instruction that he is guilty of using the gun in furtherance if the distribution of drugs and the common sense recognition that drug dealing is a dangerous and violent enterprise may support an inference that the defendant’s possession of a firearm was to facilitate drug dealing. There is no false legal premise in these instructions as the jurors were told that the dangerous and violent nature of drug dealing was “a common sense recognition.” But the jurors were then advised that the province of common sense was fully their own. Affirmed.
Court: 4th Circuit, Judge: Wilkinson, Filed On: April 10, 2024, Case #: 23-4222, Categories: Drug Offender, Firearms, jury Instructions
J. Goff finds that defendant was improperly convicted of murder because the jury had been given confusing instructions as to which party bore the burden of proof on the self-defense issue, and the instructions were not corrected during trial. Reversed.
Court: Indiana Supreme Court, Judge: Goff, Filed On: April 10, 2024, Case #: 24S-CR-123, Categories: jury, Murder, Self Defense
J. Potterfield finds that the lower court properly admitted statements that defendant's victim made while fleeing from defendant in his trial for willful injury causing bodily injury and false imprisonment because statements concerning defendant's potential prison sentence were not sufficiently specific to imply defendant had prior criminal convictions. Affirmed.
Court: Iowa Court Of Appeals, Judge: Potterfield, Filed On: April 10, 2024, Case #: 22-1448, Categories: jury, Domestic Violence, Kidnapping
J. Robinson finds that defendant was properly convicted of first degree robbery. The record shows no nonfrivolous errors regarding the conviction, and the evidence against defendant is overwhelming. Further, the trial court properly denied defendant's Batson challenge since the state asserted race-neutral reasons for the peremptory strikes of the black jurors. Affirmed.
Court: Louisiana Court Of Appeal, Judge: Robinson , Filed On: April 10, 2024, Case #: 55,582-KA, Categories: Criminal Procedure, jury, Robbery
J. Aoyagi finds the trial court properly questioned three prospective jurors. “The question is not whether the court handled voir dire perfectly, but whether its conduct was so prejudicial as to deny defendant a fair trial. It was not.” Affirmed.
Court: Oregon Court of Appeals, Judge: Aoyagi, Filed On: April 10, 2024, Case #: A177035, Categories: Drug Offender, jury
J. Baltodano finds that the trial court improperly denied defendant's objection to the peremptory challenge that removed an apparently Hispanic juror from his burglary trial. The state claimed the juror lacked life experience, but cited specific reasons in support of the claim that are presumptively invalid. Demeanor-based reasons are now presumptively invalid, the state failed to show the prospective juror had limited community ties, and the record does not indicate she did not understand the questions she was asked. Reversed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Baltodano, Filed On: April 5, 2024, Case #: B325200, Categories: Burglary, jury
Per curiam, the Texas Supreme Court finds that the court of appeals improperly ruled against Randalls in a premises liability case filed by a shopper alleging that the store should be held liable for her fall next to a grocery cart she claims was leaking its contents. The jury found that the grocery store chain did not have any constructive knowledge of the cart. The court of appeals reversed, finding that the jury should have also answered the question regarding whether Randalls had actual knowledge of the court. However, "since there is no evidence of actual knowledge of the danger, no reasonable jury could have answered the actual-knowledge question" in the shopper's favor. Reversed.
Court: Texas Supreme Court, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: April 5, 2024, Case #: 23-0041, Categories: Evidence, jury, Premises Liability
J. Ecker finds the trial court properly instructed the jury and denied defendant’s claim that he was deprived of his right to a fair trial under the due process clause due to conflicting statements by the prosecutor during cross-examination and rebuttal argument. The defendant fails to establish that the jury instruction was an injustice. Affirmed.
Court: Connecticut Supreme Court, Judge: Ecker, Filed On: April 5, 2024, Case #: SC20720, Categories: Robbery, Due Process, jury Instructions
J. Westbrook finds the trial court properly convicted defendant for sexual assault upon a minor under 14 and use of the minor in pornography based on sufficient evidence. Though defendant contends the court improperly instructed the jury that a mistake as to the victim's age is not a defense to a charge of using a minor in pornography, the state is not required to prove the defendant "knowingly" used her. Because defendant admitted he believed the minor was 16 years old during their sexual relationship, the instructional error was harmless. Affirmed.
Court: Nevada Court of Appeals, Judge: Westbrook , Filed On: April 4, 2024, Case #: 85868-COA, Categories: Sex Offender, Child Pornography, jury Instructions