11 results for 'cat:"Criminal Procedure" AND cat:"Domestic Violence"'.
J. Oliver finds that the trial court should have dismissed felony aggravated assault charges against defendant for a domestic violence incident with his brother-in-law on double jeopardy grounds. After the first day of trial the initial judge realized he was defendant's distant relative through marriage, so the presiding judge of the district recused him. The initial judge then discharged the jury and declared a mistrial. But since the initial judge had been disqualified, and he failed to provide the parties an opportunity to object to jury discharge as required under the legal necessity exception to double jeopardy, those acts were taken without authority and the mistrial functioned as an acquittal. Where a judge is disqualified after a trial has begun, either the reviewing judge or the newly assigned judge must first address whether to declare a mistrial and then decide whether the discharge the jury. Reversed.
Court: Utah Court Of Appeals, Judge: Oliver, Filed On: April 4, 2024, Case #: 20221076-CA, Categories: criminal Procedure, Double Jeopardy, domestic Violence
J. Tucher finds that the trial court properly issued a domestic violence restraining order on a husband after denying his request for continuance. He had more than the statutory five-day notice of the petition and his wife's supplemental declaration did not reset the clock to allow him to request a continuance. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Tucher, Filed On: March 19, 2024, Case #: A168081, Categories: criminal Procedure, domestic Violence
Per curiam, the Supreme Court of Ohio finds the lower court properly dismissed the inmate's petition for a writ of mandamus to compel the trial court to vacate his guilty plea on a domestic violence charge. His claim regarding whether a valid judge presided over the plea hearing is not cognizable in a mandamus claim and should have been brought on direct appeal. Affirmed.
Court: Ohio Supreme Court, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: January 23, 2024, Case #: 2024-Ohio-181, Categories: criminal Procedure, Plea, domestic Violence
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. Gratton finds that the trial court should have applied a felony enhancement to defendant's misdemeanor domestic battery charge due to a prior felony domestic battery conviction. Regardless of the timing of the underlying conduct, statute allows the enhancement if the felony conviction comes before the misdemeanor conviction. Reversed.
Court: Idaho Court Of Appeals, Judge: Gratton, Filed On: October 18, 2023, Case #: 49955, Categories: criminal Procedure, domestic Violence
J. Gomez finds that while misdemeanor convictions involving domestic violence are typically excluded from being sealed under Colorado law, the lower court erroneously failed to conduct a full analysis of defendant's request because under some circumstances, such convictions can be sealed. Therefore, the case will be remanded to allow the court to determine whether the passage of time since the offense, defendant's threat to the general public, and the need for public disclosure of the record supports a denial of the motion. Reversed in part.
Court: Colorado Court Of Appeals, Judge: Gomez, Filed On: September 28, 2023, Case #: 2023COA86, Categories: criminal Procedure, Assault, domestic Violence
J. Gabriel finds that the trial court properly convicted defendant of both harassment and stalking. The appeals court erred in concluding that an offense is included in another offense on the basis of a single distinction test. An offense is included in another offense only if it resulted in a less serious injury, lesser culpability or both, and there are no other distinctions. Harassment is not an included offense of stalking because the two crimes are distinct in several ways, so the appeals court conclusion that a single distinction test. Also, the determination of whether the crimes included an act of domestic violence was properly decided by the trial court, as the Sixth Amendment does not entitle a defendant to a jury determination for findings that do not result in a penalty. Reversed in part.
Court: Colorado Supreme Court, Judge: Gabriel, Filed On: June 12, 2023, Case #: 21SC796, Categories: criminal Procedure, domestic Violence