Sentences with phrase «appellate judges do»

District judges have the time (because they've invested the time in pretrial hearings, trials, and sentencing hearings) to make good sentencing decisions, whereas appellate judges don't have and can't have the same time invested in each case.

Youth court judges have a greater awareness than appellate judges do of the effect that admission or exclusion of the evidence would have on the reputation of the administration of justice in the community with which they deal on a daily basis.

It concluded that the challenging party's due process rights were violated because the appellate judge did not recuse himself after the opposing side contributed $ 3 million to his campaign while the case was pending.

Not exact matches

«Clearly it was very, very conservative and he had made decision after decision on the appellate court, and it ended up that he didn't get confirmed and the person who got confirmed as a Supreme Court judge — I can't even remember his name.»

The list also ensured that the next chief judge of the state's highest court won't come from the state's appellate level, as Cuomo's last three nominees to the court did.

Judge Leslie Stein, who previously served in the appellate division in Albany, did not participate in the ruling, but all six remaining judges agreed.

Fortunately, progress in stem - cell research can still continue through non-federal funds, and the prevailing zeitgeist does seem to favor an eventual nullification of the decision: Yesterday, another overreaching legal case bit the dust when an appellate judge dismissed a lawsuit that claimed CERN's Large Hadron Collider risked destroying the Earth.

[37] While Pima County Superior Court Judge James Marner had said the university did not abuse its discretion in concluding that disclosing the documents would not be in the best interests of the state, appellate Judge Joseph Howard said it was legally irrelevant what university officials thought was appropriate to disclose.

I really don't know, but then again neither do appellate experts such as Howard Bashman, who writes, «Just when you thought that every possible type of appellate opinion had already been created, Ninth Circuit Chief Judge Alex Kozinski goes and invents one more.»

To the contrary, federal appellate judges are highly respected and considered some of the brightest legal minds in the country; they did nt» secure their prestigious judgeships by being slouches.

[26] In a case such as this, the essence of the complaint is not that the reasons are functionally insufficient — the parties agree that on their face, the reasons explain what was decided and provide a basis for appellate review — but rather that the judge's wholesale incorporation of the material of others shows that he did not put his mind to the issues and decide them impartially.

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.

According to appellate court records, when the defendant tried to fire his public defender, Judge Boswell said he did not have a right to represent himself.

Because of the erroneous analytical framework applied at trial, the trial judge did not make the necessary findings of fact for an appellate court to find Mr. Katigbak guilty of the offence.

With respect to the judge, the first instance process and the appellate process are very different and it does not follow as night follows day that what is essential for one is also essential for the other.»

Thus McFarlane LJ [at 54]: «What the judge was not entitled to do was retrospectively to establish that the husband was under a positive duty to disclose any change in his financial circumstances throughout the appellate process.

Given that the two are necessarily bound up as part of a unitary determination by the trial judge, what clarification do we therefore have as to how the appellate courts should go about their role?

In so doing, any appellate court will inevitably exceed its jurisdiction to interfere with the factual component of the unitary determination by the trial judge.

So what are appellate judges to do when they come across relevant discussion from the blogosphere on a case pending review?

The appellate court found the judge's reasoning to be flawed because the Arizona Child Support Guidelines do not require an agreement between the parents to include private school expenses in the calculation of child support.

But Bowman doesn't stand a chance of ever repaying those loans now that he's been denied admission to the New York bar, because five appellate judges viewed Bowman's hefty debt and inability to repay it as evidence of a «lack of general character and fitness requisite for an attorney.»

Or perhaps it could help do a deep dive on the proclivities of appellate judges to predict opinions better.

So under the current court rules, they're doing themselves somewhat of a disservice by limiting the length of their briefs, but they decided that they'd rather have their briefs readable to the appellate judges who are reading them on their iPads.

If admissibility is challenged — as it was in Kennedy v Cordia (the appellate court held the judge did not need «instruction or advice» from the expert)-- the first consideration is the assistance to the court which the expert can give.

Questioned about rights of privacy, the appellate judge cited several amendments in the Bill of Rights and said, «I do think the right to privacy is protected under the Constitution in various ways.»

The application and appellate judges both indicated that the insurer had enough information for years with respect to the applicant to know that she was catastrophic and chose not do anything by relying on technical non-compliances.

The appellate judge held that this appeal turned on the following question — when did the additional catastrophic benefits become overdue so that interest started to accrue.

Without something to show the appellate judges what happened or what was said in the courtroom, they will just assume your judge did everything right.

At Scarinci Hollenbeck, our veteran appellate practitioners, some who were law clerks to Appellate Judges and N.J. Supreme Court Justices, have gained an intimate knowledge of the appellate process that trial lawyers, who may only occasionally be involved in an appeal, do not possess.

But how do you show the appellate judge these crucial mistakes?

The appellate judges upheld Orrick, and stated that PETA failed to meet the «significant relationship» requirement, because it did not claim to have a relationship with Naruto any more significant than to any other animal.

The various provincial and federal bodies that exercise recommendatory discipline authority over judges do not exercise appellate jurisdiction.

She argued that the judge should have instructed the jury on the «presumption of negligence» and because the judge declined to do so, the appellate court should reverse the jury verdict.

Although I have previously argued that the Piresferreira decision was legally wrong and, in fact, contrary to other appellate decisions including Sulz v. Canada, 2006 BCCA 582 and Queen v. Cognos, (the Supreme Court of Canada did not disturb or address the trial judge's award of $ 5,000 in damages for «emotional stress» in its decision in Queen v. Cognos Inc., [1993] 1 SCR 87,) this post will focus on a different issue: whether the decision highlights the differences to which claims of a hostile work environment can be put.

The biggest problem facing the ongoing Oracle v. Google retrial is that Judge Alsup doesn't seem to have swallowed the fact that the IP - specialized Federal Circuit found it hard to believe how one could get copyright law as wrong as he did in this case («confused» is what one of the appellate judges said at the December 2013 hearing).

Although making various challenges to the trial judge's refusal to stay, the appellate court affirmed due to one simple principle: a discharge does not affect a judgment to the extent that it supports a lien perfected prior to bankruptcy.

In a December 2016 article for Green Bag, Judge Posner stated that among the reforms he would implement at federal appellate courts, «the first thing to do is burn all copies of the Bluebook, in its latest edition 560 pages of rubbish».

Another researcher, James Stratman, had found his way to the early legal writing conferences, which offered him a forum for research that he had started doing at Carnegie - Mellon on the reading protocols of appellate judges.

In the pre-Booker era, appellate review did not constrain these choices sufficiently to prevent considerable disparity among judges and regions, and it is doubtful it would do so now.

Whether sentencing is by a jury's recommendation or by a judge after a plea or bench trial, the Virginia appellate courts are going to be unlikely to disturb non-capital jail or prision sentencing that does not exceed statutory limits.

Beyond that, the appellate court agreed with the trial judge's decision that there was no prevailing party — after all, Individual Defendants were tailgating on developers» position that nothing was owed, but the other side did obtain some damages on the contract cause of action.

That judges deviate from the proper sentencing range does not in itself justify appellate intervention.

In a recent conversation, which has been edited, he talked about the arguments judges don't want to hear, the importance of professionalism, and the inside information he acquired that helps him in his appellate practice today.

The reasons as rendered by the judge did allow for a meaningful appellate review.

At what point do concerns over the conduct or competency of a lower court judge rise to the level that an appellate court should report that judge to the relevant judicial council?

Canadian appellate courts usually deal with harmless error (usually an evidentiary ruling by a trial judge that, while mistaken, does not meet the standard of reversible error on appeal, or to warrant a new trial) in the context of criminal trials.

Don't Forget or Ignore the Standard of Review A second thing Judge Boudin was surprised to realize upon going on the bench was the critical importance to appellate judges of the standard of review.

That's not CA3blog's theme, but I do say appellate lawyers need to understand judges better.

However, we believe it is apparent that some appellate judges are bringing to the bench doctrinaire philosophies that have little to do with a search for real justice.

If you think that what Judge Kozinski did was bad, I know of federal appellate judges who have publicly admitted to viewing child pornography: Of course, those other judges did that in the context of adjudicating appeals in which a criminal defendant was challenging the sufficiency of the evidence supporting a child pornography conviction.