Chaos at the Capitol: New thread edition

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by SunnySide

Appeals based on factual determinations are near impossible as review courts defer to the fact finder who actually heard the evidence at trial vs superimposing their own view from reading a record. Courts give trials deference.

Appeals based on misapplication of law or judicial error .. those have legs. Standard is lower.

This judge (and every judge, even your district court county judge) knows that if they want an appeal proof judgment to try and base decision on a finding of fact.
---------

Had a bench trial 2 weeks ago, hit and run car accident, small case. Defense stipulated to liability in the hopes it would be inadmissible to introduce evidence of the hit and run. I had my client testify as to hit and run. defense objects and puts their "objection on the record" which indicates you are going to appeal. Defense moved for mistrial. judge denied.

Judge clearly stated on the record that he would not consider the hit and run testimony in reaching his verdict.

Judge gave me 3 times my specials (i was expecting 2) ... he took the hit and run into account but made an appeal proof record that he wouldnt.

So after a prosecution and the defendant has been acquitted, can the prosecution file an appeal of a jury or judge decision? Seems like that might be a problem