Sentences with phrase «reached by a jury»

Illinois Mary E. Smith Foundation — Providing the Public With Information on Brain Tumors Cook County Undiagnosed Brain Injury Verdict Reached By Jury

The verdict reached by a jury was in favour of the defendant.

Not exact matches

«With today's verdict of guilty reached by an impartial and independent jury, the clean - up of corruption in New York continues in courtrooms.

«It is not clear beyond a reasonable doubt that a rational jury would have reached the same conclusion if properly instructed, as is required by the law for the verdict to stand,» Jose Cabranes of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals decision said in his decision.

«With today's verdict of guilty reached by an impartial and independent jury, the clean - up of corruption in New York continues in courtrooms,» Mr. Bharara said a statement.

In Thursday's ruling, the appellate court ruled the judge's erroneous instruction to the jury at Silver's trial «was not harmless because it is not clear beyond a reasonable doubt that a rational jury would have reached the same conclusion if properly instructed, as is required by law for the verdict to stand.»

While nothing official has been released by Staten Island District Attorney Daniel Donovan, some elected officials and advocates have already begun reacting to the reports of the grand jury reaching a conclusion, and calling for any protest to be peaceful.

Hours after the I - Team reached out, a lawyer for Westchester county and its jail medical provider filed a letter with the court expressing concern the publicizing of Grant's deposition could taint the jury pool, and suggesting there had been a misunderstanding that would be cleared up by Wednesday.

Other highlights in this section include: Pablo Larraín's THE CLUB, a mordant morality tale set in a sleepy Chilean coastal town, which won Berlin's Grand Jury Prize; CHRONIC, Michel Franco's uncompromising study of grief and isolation, featuring a revelatory performance by Tim Roth; brothers Tarzan and Arab Nasser's feature directorial debut, DÉGRADÉ, a smart drama that moves seamlessly between humour and despair, set in a women's hair salon in Gaza; the European Premiere of George Amponsah's intimate documentary THE HARD STOP, revealing the story of Mark Duggan's friends and family following his death after being shot in a «Hard Stop» police procedure in 2011; Jonas Carpignano's engrossing feature debut, THE MEASURE OF A MAN which won Vincent Lindon Best Actor at Cannes Film Festival, MEDITERRANEA, an ultra-topical tale of two young African men from Burkina Faso who, in search of a better life, make the difficult and dangerous trip across the Sahara desert and Mediterranean Sea to reach Italy; the drama MUCH LOVED, Nabil Ayouch's searing, no - holds - barred look at the world of prostitution in Morocco; David Evans» thought - provoking documentary MY NAZI LEGACY, which raises the harrowing question, «What if your father was a Nazi?»

One of just a few examples of a resident physician succeeding in reaching a jury with claims of discrimination and breach of contract by a training program.

If such a settlement is not reached and your case goes to trial, our personal injury lawyers will continue to represent you through mediation or negotiations or, if necessary, a trial by jury.

In Wilson v Her Majesty's Advocate 2009 JC 336, which also concerned opinion evidence, the High Court of Justiciary, in an opinion delivered by Lord Wheatley, stated the test thus (at para 58): «[T] he subject - matter under discussion must be necessary for the proper resolution of the dispute, and be such that a judge or jury without instruction or advice in the particular area of knowledge or experience would be unable to reach a sound conclusion without the help of a witness who had such specialised knowledge or experience.»

They said that by laying separate counts of murder and attempted murder, the Crown improperly parsed the killing into two discrete events to be considered in isolation from each other, inviting the jury to reach a compromise verdict that defied common sense.

He put forth no effort to prevent a death sentence, which helps explain how the jury quickly reached a death sentence verdict (within three hours of deliberation) at the sentencing phase The trial judge quickly followed up by the next day with eighteen death sentences and fifteen life sentences.

Trial court abused its discretion by concluding that newly discovered evidence of close relationship between prosecution witness and gang prostitute failed to show that jury would have reached a different verdict.

After reaching a peak of 3,600 trials in 1985, the number of tort cases concluded by bench or jury trial has declined by nearly 80 %.

«This obligation — to reach an independent judgment in applying constitutional standards and criteria to constitutional issues that may be cast by lower courts «in the form of determinations of fact» — appears fully applicable to findings of obscenity by juries, trial courts, and administrative agencies.

The jury must reach its verdict by considering only the evidence introduced in court and the directions of the judge.

Rarely, a more complex case where negotiation can't be reached will go to court and the damage award will be determined by a judge or a jury.

Given the actual verdict reached, does the author stand by his comments about jury nullification in this case?

Thus, it stressed, the rate of convictions to offences recorded as rape is currently 5.7 % and by nonchalantly setting this bare statistic alongside the notion that juries are commonly influenced by myths and stereotypes about victim typology, the implied conclusion is reached that convictions by juries remain, as it put it in para 4 of the report, «unacceptably low».

Despite recognizing that some other courts have reached a different conclusion, the Ohio Supreme Court held that jury's weighing of aggravating circumstances against mitigating factors is not a fact - finding process, so it is not governed by Hurst, but even if it were, there was no violation because Ohio law requires the jury to unanimously agree that aggravating circumstances outweigh mitigating circumstances beyond a reasonable doubt before the trial judge can consider imposing a death sentence.

Jury nullification in the broader sense can cause cases to be thrown out by a judge or on appeal for reasons # 4 or # 5, but most of the time, jury nullification will not cause a verdict to be thrown out by a judge or on appeal (even if statements from jurors after the trial make it clear that jury nullification in the broader sense actually took place), if a jury that weighed the evidence and evaluated the credibility of the witnesses differently than the actual jury did could have reached the same verdJury nullification in the broader sense can cause cases to be thrown out by a judge or on appeal for reasons # 4 or # 5, but most of the time, jury nullification will not cause a verdict to be thrown out by a judge or on appeal (even if statements from jurors after the trial make it clear that jury nullification in the broader sense actually took place), if a jury that weighed the evidence and evaluated the credibility of the witnesses differently than the actual jury did could have reached the same verdjury nullification will not cause a verdict to be thrown out by a judge or on appeal (even if statements from jurors after the trial make it clear that jury nullification in the broader sense actually took place), if a jury that weighed the evidence and evaluated the credibility of the witnesses differently than the actual jury did could have reached the same verdjury nullification in the broader sense actually took place), if a jury that weighed the evidence and evaluated the credibility of the witnesses differently than the actual jury did could have reached the same verdjury that weighed the evidence and evaluated the credibility of the witnesses differently than the actual jury did could have reached the same verdjury did could have reached the same verdict.

With the very narrow, newly created exception for guilty verdicts in criminal cases reached based upon racial or other kinds of impermissible prejudice rather than the facts of the case (or cases where there is an outside influence on the jury such as a bribe or someone looking up facts or law on the Internet), no one can challenge a jury verdict based upon the reasoning and conclusions actually made by the jurors, even if someone learns that the jury knowingly or accidentally didn't follow the law or was mistaken about the facts.

No evidence was presented at trial that could have permitted the jury to reach the result that it did (This kind of reversal of a jury verdict on appeal or by the judge after a trial, is fairly common.).

Kleros will draw a jury of experts who will analyze the evidence and reach a verdict, with all fees delivered by smart contract.