667 results for 'cat:"Jury"'.
J. Shepherd finds a lower court properly dismissed a hand sanitizer company's motion for a new trial concerning contract claims against a wholesaler. The hand sanitizer company argued that it was entitled to a new trial after a jury awarded the wholesaler upwards of a million dollars in damages. However, the wholesaler sufficiently showed in court that the hand sanitizer company consistently fluctuated its prices and delayed shipping times, which resulted in a loss of customers. Affirmed.
Court: 8th Circuit, Judge: Shepherd, Filed On: February 28, 2024, Case #: 22-3570, Categories: jury, Damages, Contract
[Consolidated.] J. Hunter vacates defendant's conviction for being a principal to second degree murder because it was rendered by a non-unanimous jury. However, defendant's conviction for conspiracy to commit second degree murder was proper because a witness testified that defendant was present when the murder took place, that defendant shook hands with the person who shot the victim, and that defendant led the police to the victim's body. Vacated in part.
Court: Louisiana Court Of Appeal, Judge: Hunter, Filed On: February 28, 2024, Case #: 55,497-KA, Categories: Evidence, jury, Murder
J. Ellender finds that defendant was properly convicted of manslaughter and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. Defendant's challenge to a juror was properly denied because the juror indicated he could be fair and impartial, despite his connections to law enforcement. Further, defendant's 70-year sentence was proper based on his extensive criminal history, including drug possession and battery charges, and the fact that the victim was killed without justification. Affirmed.
Court: Louisiana Court Of Appeal, Judge: Ellender, Filed On: February 28, 2024, Case #: 55,289-KA, Categories: jury, Sentencing, Manslaughter
J. Barrett finds the trial court properly convicted defendant for sexual assault. The victim testified to experiencing multiple sexual assaults by defendant, her mother's boyfriend, occurring over a period of years between the ages of 3 and 14. Notably, though she had not seen defendant's penis, she knew what it was when he forced it into her mouth in a dark room. Defendant was apprised of the charges, and the jury was correctly not instructed on limiting certain conduct to rape and other conduct to sexual assault. Witness credibility is an issue for the jury, and the victim's testimony is sufficient. Affirmed.
Court: Arkansas Court Of Appeals, Judge: Barrett , Filed On: February 28, 2024, Case #: CR 23-147, Categories: Sex Offender, 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. McCullough finds the lower court improperly determined that the originating court abused its discretion in declining to provide funds to retain several experts who would assist the defendant in challenging his confession. The defendant admitted to four counts of rape and one count of object sexual penetration of a child under the age of thirteen. The defendant later sought to hire a psychologist to assist him in court on the subject of mental deficits that make a person vulnerable to coercive interrogation tactics. The jury could view the video of the interrogation and evaluate the impact of the police tactics for themselves meaning he did not require an expert on the subject of police interrogation tactics.
Court: Virginia Supreme Court, Judge: McCullough, Filed On: February 28, 2024, Case #: 220382, Categories: jury, Sex Offender, Child Victims
J. McKinnon holds that the trial court erred in admitting an uncharged act of sexual assault to show a common scheme with charged counts of sexual assault. The uncharged acts could not prove a common motive or plan since they occurred after the charged acts. Also, the jury was improperly instructed on the mental state required for sexual assault. Reversed.
Court: Montana Supreme Court, Judge: McKinnon, Filed On: February 27, 2024, Case #: DA 22-0547, Categories: Evidence, Sex Offender, jury Instructions
J. Wilkin finds that inconsistencies in the testimony of the victim's uncle do not render defendant's conviction for unlawful sexual conduct with a minor improper. Not only was the jury in the best position to determine witness credibility, but text messages proved defendant was at home on the night of the assault when he asked the victim to return a drill borrowed by the uncle, who lived across the street. Meanwhile, testimony from a police officer that defendant did not wish to make a statement during the investigation did not prejudice the jury against him because his decision to remain silent was not mentioned in opening or closing arguments, while there was also overwhelming evidence to support his guilt. Affirmed.
Court: Ohio Court Of Appeals, Judge: Wilkin, Filed On: February 27, 2024, Case #: 2024-Ohio-794, Categories: Evidence, jury, Sex Offender
J. Easterbrook finds that the lower court properly rejected defendant's claim he was denied a speedy trial due to the general order that suspended criminal jury trials from March 2020 through April 2021 due to the Covid-19 pandemic. Social and epidemiological considerations permitted the delay of criminal jury trials during the pandemic and district judges may rely on institutional findings such as the general order without making defendant-specific findings in such circumstances. Affirmed.
Court: 7th Circuit, Judge: Easterbrook, Filed On: February 26, 2024, Case #: 22-2470, Categories: Criminal Procedure, jury, Speedy Trial
J. Azrack orders a new trial for a landlord’s First Amendment retaliation claims. A jury awarded him $76,550 in damages after finding a municipality on the southern shore of Long Island violated his rights when the commissioner for its planning and development department filed four civil lawsuits against him and denied his rental permit applications for his four rental properties after he voiced opposition to how the town served criminal summonses and its refusal to grant his applications. The court finds the jury’s verdict lacks legal support and ruled against the weight of the evidence.
Court: USDC Eastern District of New York, Judge: Azrack, Filed On: February 26, 2024, Case #: 2:12cv5434, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: jury, First Amendment
J. Kruger holds that the trial court was within its discretion to deny a builder's request for relief from its waiver of its right to a jury trial in a contract dispute with a homeowner. The trial court properly prioritized the hardship the builder faced in preparing for a jury trial that the homeowner had requested, and then waived, when considering the builder's request for relief from its own jury trial waiver. But the trial court also had discretion to consider that the builder failed to demand a jury or post jury fees until the day the trial began. Also, the builder failed to show on appeal that the denial caused actual prejudice. Affirmed.
Court: California Supreme Court, Judge: Kruger, Filed On: February 26, 2024, Case #: S273368, Categories: Civil Procedure, jury, Contract
J. Higginbotham finds the district court properly convicted defendant for producing child pornography. Law enforcement learned that internet addresses associated with a church uploaded child pornography images to a website. A warranted search of the church yielded a hard drive with videos of children taking baths in the church's offices. Certain videos captured defendant working with the pastor to set up the porn shoots. The court properly denied defendant's motion to suppress statements made to investigators where he admitted to setting up the shoots, or in excluding a psychologist's testimony that defendant shows no signs of pedophilia. Affirmed.
Court: 5th Circuit, Judge: Higginbotham , Filed On: February 23, 2024, Case #: 23-40144, Categories: Sex Offender, Child Pornography, jury Instructions
J. Africk grants a request by a district attorney and his assistant state prosecutor to dismiss state law defamation claims by a litigant in connection with his arrest for taking pictures of a carnival amusement ride at a Catholic school fair. In an earlier federal suit related to that incident, a jury found a single sheriff’s deputy liable for excessive force violations, false arrest and imprisonment, and malicious prosecution. State prosecutors are protected by the doctrine of absolute immunity, while other claims are dismissed as time-barred.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Louisiana , Judge: Africk, Filed On: February 23, 2024, Case #: 2:23cv1247, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: jury, Malicious Prosecution, Police Misconduct
J. Tenney finds defendant’s counsel failed to ask for jury instructions that would define the serious bodily injury on his possession of a dangerous weapon counts. Defendant was not prejudiced for the convictions based on a chain with padlock and an axe, but he was prejudiced to the conviction based on a turkey hook. The counsel properly chose not to move for direct verdict on the paraphernalia count, because there is enough evidence to support that claim. Therefore, there only needs to be a new conviction regarding the weapon counts. Reversed.
Court: Utah Court Of Appeals, Judge: Tenney, Filed On: February 23, 2024, Case #: 20220143-CA, Categories: Drug Offender, Weapons, jury Instructions
J. Guidry vacates the trial court's judgments in an auto accident case that stems from a driver hitting a deer on the interstate. The trial court improperly denied the motion for mistrial since nine of the twelve jurors were not in agreement regarding the allocation of fault to each party. Also, a directed verdict was erroneously granted on the affirmative defenses of force majeure and sudden emergency because there was conflicting testimony about the parties' actions after the deer entered the roadway. Vacated.
Court: Louisiana Court Of Appeal, Judge: Guidry, Filed On: February 23, 2024, Case #: 2023CA0718, Categories: jury, Negligence
J. Lanier finds that defendant was properly convicted and sentenced for battery of a police officer for an incident in which he attacked a deputy at a medical clinic for inmates. There was no error in the denial of defendant's cause challenge of a prospective juror who did not initially disclose she had previously dated the friend of the Assistant District Attorney 20 years ago because she did not consider this a "close personal relationship" that would hinder her ability to be fair and impartial. Affirmed.
Court: Louisiana Court Of Appeal, Judge: Lanier, Filed On: February 23, 2024, Case #: 2023KA0755, Categories: jury, Battery
J. Heavican finds the trial court properly convicted defendant for first-degree sexual assault and sentenced to 35 to 40 years imprisonment. The victim, after a night of partying and drinking in multiple locations, accepted a ride from defendant. Defendant parked his vehicle in a parking lot before beginning his assault on the protesting victim, who then reported the assault to a police officer who had pulled up behind defendant's vehicle. There was no error in the court’s jury instruction on consent or its decision not to allow continued impeachment of the victim's prior statements to police. Affirmed.
Court: Nebraska Supreme Court, Judge: Heavican , Filed On: February 23, 2024, Case #: S-23-147, Categories: Evidence, Sex Offender, jury Instructions
J. Kemp finds the trial court properly convicted defendant for two counts of first-degree murder. Officers responded to a call by a victim's son when he discovered his mother and defendant's father dead from gunshot wounds. The father's body appeared to officers to be posed with a gun in its hand, though it was later confirmed he had been shot six times by that very gun. Furthermore, the trial court properly rejected proffered instructions on justification and kidnapping because there was no evidence defendant reasonably believed the victims were about to commit a felony with force or violence, or that his life was in imminent danger. Affirmed.
Court: Arkansas Supreme Court, Judge: Kemp , Filed On: February 22, 2024, Case #: CR-23-486, Categories: Evidence, Murder, jury Instructions
J. Anderson affirms the defendant's convictions first-degree premeditated murder and attempted first-degree premeditated murder. The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying motions to strike a juror for cause and for a change of venue, since the juror did not express actual bias and the defendant failed to renew the venue motion following voir dire. The circumstances of the murder, namely the bombing of a clinic and shootings of staff members after repeated statements encouraging the murder of nurses, also support the inference that the defendant intended to kill his victims. Affirmed.
Court: Minnesota Supreme Court, Judge: Anderson, Filed On: February 21, 2024, Case #: A22-1340, Categories: Intent, jury, Murder
J. Miller finds that defendant was properly convicted of counts including second degree murder and first degree feticide for a drive-by shooting that killed a woman and her unborn child. Defendant's motion for mistrial was correctly denied since he was not prejudiced by a sergeant's testimony about the contents of surveillance video that was inadvertently destroyed. Affirmed.
Court: Louisiana Court Of Appeal, Judge: Miller, Filed On: February 21, 2024, Case #: 2023KA0361, Categories: Criminal Procedure, jury, Murder
J. Sutton finds that the lower court properly convicted defendant of rape, sodomy, and kidnapping. The state proved beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant locked the victim in the trunk of her car and drover her to a secluded spot so he could force her to perform oral sex at gunpoint. Further, the court did not err in declining to answer the jury's question about whether defendant's sentences would run consecutively or concurrently. Affirmed.
Court: Missouri Court Of Appeals, Judge: Sutton, Filed On: February 20, 2024, Case #: WD85844, Categories: Sex Offender, Kidnapping, jury Instructions
J. Cannataro finds that defendant was properly convicted of aggravated vehicular homicide and manslaughter for causing a three-car accident that killed one person and seriously injured four others. Defendant contends his trial rights were violated since he could not gauge prospective jurors due to Covid-19 protocols requiring that they wear face masks unless being questioned individually, but defendant did not have a specific right to an unobstructed view of every potential juror's face during the selection process. Affirm.
Court: New York Court Of Appeals, Judge: Cannataro, Filed On: February 20, 2024, Case #: 13, Categories: Constitution, jury, Vehicular Homicide
J. Singas finds that defendant was properly convicted of murder, attempted murder, and assault stemming from an altercation outside a bar that resulted in a stabbing death and serious injury from a neck slashing. The jury was instructed on justification in light of the self-defense claims, but the court did not abuse its discretion by failing to revisit that information when deliberating jurors asked to be recharged on the elements of the alleged crimes. Affirmed.
Court: New York Court Of Appeals, Judge: Singas, Filed On: February 20, 2024, Case #: 03, Categories: Self Defense, jury Instructions
J. Hardin-Tammons finds that the lower court properly found defendant guilty of murder and armed criminal action. The state presented sufficient evidence to prove he intended to shoot the victim given that her death was caused by a close-range shot to the head. Further, the court did not plainly err by not instructing the jury on the lesser included offense of involuntary manslaughter. Affirmed.
Court: Missouri Court Of Appeals, Judge: Hardin-Tammons, Filed On: February 20, 2024, Case #: ED111322, Categories: Intent, Murder, jury Instructions
J. Gibbons finds the trial court properly convicted defendant for attempted sexual assault and incest. Defendant says the court incorrectly accepted his Alford plea being that he did not understand the elements of sexual assault. Defendant did not take his plea until after voir dire, when the victims were ready to testify. The court also based its sentencing decision on the facts of the crimes, indicating the defendant's failure to acknowledge his immorality was used as a sentencing factor. The court did not vindictively sentence defendant because he exercised his right to a jury trial. Affirmed
Court: Nevada Court of Appeals, Judge: Gibbons , Filed On: February 20, 2024, Case #: 85880-CoA, Categories: jury, Sex Offender, Child Victims