Sentences with phrase «appeal against their conviction on»

The client would have to appeal against their conviction on the grounds that it was based on inadmissable evidence.

He appealed against his convictions on three grounds, two of which related to procedural issues not relevant for present purposes.

[3] The appellant now appeals against her conviction on two grounds.

The appellant appealed against conviction on the basis that the statement was privileged.

Not exact matches

But using the standard that Bharara used in the Silver case (and, arguably, his case against former Senate Majority Leader Dean Skelos, who was busted on similar charges and is also appealing his conviction), the prisons would be filled with people who made a campaign contribution so they can get a meeting with a politician.

``... If they feel the fines are not big enough, then the AG could appeal against not the conviction, but the sentencing; the amount of the fine, to give another court the opportunity to review,» Mr. Ankomah opined on Eyewitness News.

A New York state appeals judge upheld a conviction against former Goldman Sachs programmer Sergey Aleynikov on Thursday — likely...

APPEAL by accused against conviction on one count of assault causing bodily harm, sentence to two - year term of probation and $ 1,000.00 fine, and order to provide DNA sample.

Accused went to cottage of JC with whom she previously cohabited — Accused found JC with victim, another lady, in sauna — Angry words were exchanged between accused and JC — Victim testified that accused pushed her following verbal exchange, as a result victim lost balance and ended up against stove, thereby sustaining serious burns to body — Trial judge accepted victim's evidence that there was some kind of pushing — Accused convicted on one count of assault causing bodily harm, and sentenced to two - year term of probation and $ 1,000.00 fine, and accused was also ordered to provide DNA sample pursuant to s. 487.04 of Criminal Code — Accused appealed — Appeal against conviction dismissed — Although trial judge did not address analytical steps in order, he properly analyzed evidence and concluded that injuries sustained by victim were not accidental and could not have occurred in any other fashion than as stated by victim — Having provided reasons for accepting victim's evidence, trial judge was entitled to reject accused's evidence — Trial judge's reasoning, though skeletal, permitted accused and appellate court to determine how and why finding resulted.

Accused went to cottage of JC with whom she previously cohabited — Accused found JC with victim, another lady, in sauna — Angry words were exchanged between accused and JC — Victim testified that accused pushed her following verbal exchange, as a result victim lost balance and ended up against stove, thereby sustaining serious burns to body — Trial judge accepted victim's evidence that there was some kind of pushing — Accused convicted on one count of assault causing bodily harm, and sentenced to two - year term of probation and $ 1,000.00 fine, accused was also ordered to provide DNA sample pursuant to s. 487.04 of Criminal Code — Accused appealed — Appeal against sentence was allowed — Trial judge erred in concluding that discharge was not appropriate in circumstances, especially given conclusion that accused did not deliberately attempt to injure victim — Trial judge found that there was no need for either specific deterrence or general deterrence; prime concern was need for denunciation of her conduct — Section 730 of Criminal Code permits discharge in cases of this nature, provided that it was in best interest of accused and not contrary to public interest — Accused was responsible individual with no record whatsoever, she held position as counsellor and social worker for 25 years — Trial judge did not find that conviction would definitely affect her employment, but possibility existed, and such conviction would necessarily result in criminal record — There was no likelihood of re-offending — Conditional discharge would not be contrary to public interest.

His appeal against conviction was dismissed by a majority of the Court of Appeal for Ontario... We agree with Justice Pardu that the trial judge's reasons, even when read as a whole and in the context of the trial record, fail to reveal the basis on which the trial judge concluded that the Crown had proven the mental element of the offence beyond a reasonable appeal against conviction was dismissed by a majority of the Court of Appeal for Ontario... We agree with Justice Pardu that the trial judge's reasons, even when read as a whole and in the context of the trial record, fail to reveal the basis on which the trial judge concluded that the Crown had proven the mental element of the offence beyond a reasonable Appeal for Ontario... We agree with Justice Pardu that the trial judge's reasons, even when read as a whole and in the context of the trial record, fail to reveal the basis on which the trial judge concluded that the Crown had proven the mental element of the offence beyond a reasonable doubt.

The Divisional Court this morning allowed the appeal of Paul Chambers against his conviction by the Crown Court in Doncaster in relation to a joke made on Twitter.

The phrase is not defined in Code s. 686 (1)(a)(iii) which simply states that a court of appeal may allow an appeal against conviction, ``... on any ground where there was a miscarriage of justice».

The Court of Appeal, in commenting on the safeness of the conviction, had listed the other «overwhelming» evidence against the applicant.

The defendant appealed against conviction for an offence of racially aggravated threatening behaviour, contrary to the Public Order Act 1986, s 4 and the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 (CDA 1998), s 31 (1)(a), arguing that the phrase used was not capable of demonstrating hostility based on membership of a racial group.

(viii) Pt 63 (appeal to the Crown Court against conviction or sentence) is amended so that the Crown Court may, in certain circumstances, enter on an appeal with the judge sitting with a single justice, when hearing an appeal from a magistrates» court.

Although the concept of «reasonable excuse» is broad, it can not have been intended by Parliament to be stretched to include the mere fact that the defendant has lodged an appeal against the community order or the conviction on which it is based.

Appointed in March 2003, he was originally given until December 31, 2005 to review and report on the investigations and circumstances surrounding the resulting criminal proceedings against Gregory Parsons and Randy Druken, and determine why Ronald Dalton's appeal of his murder conviction took eight years to be heard by the Newfoundland and Labrador Court of Aappeal of his murder conviction took eight years to be heard by the Newfoundland and Labrador Court of AppealAppeal.

To preclude a civil litigant from relitigating an issue previously found against him in a criminal prosecution is less severe than to preclude him from relitigating such an issue in successive civil trials, for there are rigorous safeguards against unjust conviction, including the requirements of proof beyond a reasonable doubt and of a unanimous verdict, the right to counsel, and a record paid for by the state on appeal.

The appeal judge rejected all of those arguments because the employer was a «substantial corporation» (two facilities with a total of 770 people) that was «within a broader group of companies»; the employer had been found guilty on three charges under the OHSA; it was proper to consider the prior conviction (which was in 2004); and the harm to the injured worker was «devastating»: he was rendered a paraplegic when a robot on which he was doing a «quick fix» pressed against him on his back.