Sentences with phrase «ruled against the prosecution»

Seibel also ruled against the prosecution's assertion that St. Lawrence intentionally withheld an $ 800,000 debt from the town board, and said she doesn't see these two rulings as grounds for a mistrial.

Not exact matches

Thousands of prosecutions against welfare recipients who failed to report changes in circumstances have been thrown into doubt by a High Court ruling.

The Crown Prosecution Service has ruled that no charges will be brought against Conservative Party candidates following an investigation into how 2015 campaign spending was reported.

Bharara also said he might have done some things differently in his prosecution of two former legislative leaders had the cases come before a recent Supreme Court ruling that reversed the corruption charges against former Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell.

The sixth case study is political and many people are / were willing to overlook this particular one, in the national interest - the fact that it appears that persons who are members of the ruling party have a de facto immunity against prosecution for corruption, while the arrests and trials appear directed against members of the opposition PDP.

Bharara also said he might have done some things differently in his prosecution of two former legislative leaders, had the cases come before a recent Supreme Court ruling that reversed the corruption charges against former Virginia Governor McDonnell.

«Further, to end a culture of corruption and impunity of perpetrators, we urge the Attorney General of the Federation and the Minister of Justice Mr Abubakar Malami, SAN to urgently take over the prosecution of the corruption case against Mr Saraki by ensuring that the CCT decision is urgently appealed and that the case is diligently prosecuted within the limits of the rule of law.

Reasons included (1) judges «grade on a curve» and, after sitting through 20 cases involving violent crimes, might not find a more minor crime as serious whereas a jury would not share this context; (2) defendants will select those judges who they believe will be more inclined to acquit; (3) judges are bound by fixed sentencing rules so rather than sentence a defendant of a nonserious crime to a lengthy term they avoid that dilemma through acquittal; (4) judges might better understand the complex elements of certain corporate crimes and, unlike a jury, would recognize when the prosecution failed to carry its burden and (5) some judges may just have something against prosecutors.

Recently, her lawyer / boyfriend, Howard K. Stern (not Howard Stern the DJ), received a ruling on the prosecution's appeal of the dismissal of charges against him.

(correct test for Barrister appeals; whether outside the ex improviso rule, prosecutor may call evidence after prosecution and defence case closed; use of debarring orders against prosecutor; whether tribunal may «enter the arena» and strongly request the attendance of a prosecution witness; whether BSB has power to summons witnesses; whether prosecutor may communicate with disciplinary judge behind the back of the defence; whether such communication redolent of actual bias of judge where judge wishes prosecutor good luck on appeal; whether apparent bias doctrine can be engaged by post-trial conduct of judge; legal effect of serving BSB prosecutions department officer being 1 of 4 appointing members of the COIC «Tribunals Appointments Body» (TAB); whether TAB ultra vires the Bar's Constitutions; whether open - ended power of removal of member of COIC pool without cause, unlawful given position of BSB Chair and senior staff on COIC; whether ECHR Article 6 guarantees against pressure on disciplinary judges to conform with a prosecutorial mentality; whether disciplinary judges Art. 6 «independent» within Findlay v United Kingdom given key role of BSB prosecutions department in appointing disciplinary judges; serious non-disclosure by BSB of notes of secret meeting between BSB and disciplinary judge until day before appeal and despite requests and application for disclosure by defence)

Eugene Volokh reports on a recent Ninth Circuit ruling in the case of Williams v. Cavazos in which a juror, who was reluctant to convict, was dismissed in the middle of deliberations: Dismissing a Holdout Juror in the Middle of Deliberations Because «His Mind Is Bent... Against the Prosecution»

- A new Pt 66 (appeal to the Court of Appeal against ruling at preparatory hearing), in substitution for the existing Pt 66 (appeal to the Court of Appeal against ruling adverse to prosecution).

The rules that relate to an appeal against a ruling adverse to the prosecution are found in the new Pt 67 (Appeal to the Court of Appeal against ruling adverse to prosecution).

The defendant alleged that admitting the victim's statement at trial would violate his 6th Amendment right to confront the witnesses against him as set forth in Crawford v. Washington, while the prosecution argued that the statement constituted an exception to the hearsay rule as an excited utterance and its admission would not violate the 6th Amendment.

Ontario Superior Court Justice Ian Nordheimer ruled in R. v. Nestlé Canada Inc., that «settlement privilege» does not trump the Crown's disclosure obligations in a criminal prosecution against another party.

As reported by Law360, a California state judge recently ruled that Latham & Watkins tentatively was entitled to an award of attorney's fees to the tune of about $ 1.6 million as damages in a malicious prosecution case against litigants Messrs. Parrish and Fitzgibbons, in a case which produced quite a bit of appellate activity (including a published California Supreme Court decision).