Sentences with phrase «up to the trial judge»

It is up to the trial judge to understand the facts better than anyone and then portray them honestly.

Ultimately it will be up to the trial judge to determine the scope of Dr. Ford's expertise.

Not exact matches

Police have up to 48 hours to investigate Bollore, after which a judge may be asked whether there are grounds for a formal investigation — the next step towards a possible trial — to be launched.

While Waymo wanted to bring up software trade secrets the company believed Uber took as part of this lawsuit — which is about self - driving hardware called lidar — the judge said it would add too much to this trial but ruled the company could file a separate lawsuit related to software after this ended.

It is not the judges right or duty to express his personal opinions or beliefs while sitting on the bench, especially while giving a verdict.Judges are there to make sure due process and a fair and impartial hearing or trial takes place for all those involved.this particular judge's rant on the muslim world based on his views from serving in the military had absolutely no bearing on the case and should not have even been brought up much less used to chastise the victim with.

But the judge still ordered that my ex gets one half my paycheck for life in addition to half of all assets, even though I put her through undergraduate and graduate school and she always worked her whole life up until the divorce trial date.

The two workers were evidently granted a new trial by a different judge later in 2007, and in November of that year wound up accepting a plea deal that allowed them to serve probation without actually admitting to any wrongdoing.

«In the future, depending on the number of cases that will come up for trial, the Judiciary may increase the courts and number of Judges to ensure that the courts are not overwhelmed by the volume of work and that the cases are dealt with expeditiously,» the statement added.

This morning, his lawyer turned up in court with a motion for bail but the trial judge refused to grant the motion, and remanded Kojo Asante in custody until the next trial date, Monday, September 18.

White Plains federal Judge Kenneth Karas got fed up with a politically connected lawyer's bid to delay the upcoming corruption trial of state Sen. Malcolm Smith over her pregnancy, suggesting in a ruling Wednesday that she lied about needing doctor - ordered bed rest when the case is scheduled to go to trial.

Daniel Gitner, the attorney for defendant Peter Galbraith Kelly, wrote to federal Judge Valerie Caproni last week about a hallway - length exhibit about famous cases set up outside the courtroom where the parties expect the trial will be held.

U.S. District Court Judge Gary Sharpe refused to dismiss former Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno's corruption case, setting up the potential for another trial for the Rennselaer County Republican.

As the trial broke for lunch, the judge acidly advised Gitner to wrap up his cross-examination by the end of Wednesday.

The federal judge overseeing Democratic Sen. Robert Menendez's (N.J.) corruption trial told the senator's lawyer to «shut up for a moment» on Wednesday.

Jegede and another international lawyer, Mr. Charles Adeogun - Philips, have been engaged by the Federal Government to prosecute all the judges it lined up for trial.

Before criminal trials start to rely on the newer features of dating apps, such as sexual health history and HIV status categories, we need to come up with a way to ensure judges and juries understand how nuanced this evidence might be.

State laws allow bail bond companies to charge defendants a premium of up to 12 percent of the face value of the bond imposed by a judge, in exchange for a promise to pay the full amount to the court if the defendant doesn't show up for trial.

Around 33 state attorneys general and the Department of Justice are looking to get up to $ 840m (# 501m) in damages out of Apple in the July trial, after District Judge Denise Cote found Apple complicit in the conspiracy to raise ebook prices in an attempt to break Amazon's growing stranglehold on the fledgling market.

Judge Senyk indicated he wanted to wrap up the trial the next day, Tuesday.

Not so, like lawyers bringing up inadmissible evidence or points in trial and the judge tells the jury to ignore it, the damage is already done.

For various reasons, the trial judge found Ontario did not have the right to take up the Keewatin lands within the boundaries of Treaty 3 without receiving authorization from the federal government.

He frequently brought up matters that the trial judge warned him were prejudicial to his case, he declined to cross-examine the complainants, and he eventually abandoned his closing address after objections that he was trying to adduce new evidence.

In a rather unusual case, an Ontario Superior Court judge has set aside a default judgment that was obtained at an uncontested trial where the defendant intentionally decided not to show up.

4 a show up on trial date and talk to the DA (before the judge comes in) to try to plead it down.

The moot rounds are all judged exclusively by actual judges, ranging from the trial level all the way up to the Supreme Court of Canada.

The Crown should ask the trial judge to reconsider the Corbett ruling so that the jury (or trial judge in a judge - alone trial) gets a fair and complete picture.209 Similarly, in a jury case, a defence strategy centred on an attack on the credibility of the victim can affect an accused's successful Corbett application, potentially opening up his or her entire criminal record to cross-examination for credibility purposes.210

If they don't dismiss it and reschedule the trial (reset it), object to the judge telling him that you showed up ready for trial and it was a great inconvenience to you (maybe you took off work, or arranged child care) and that to reset it would be a burden to you, then ask for dismissal.

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 resuTrial 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 resutrial 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 resutrial 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 resuTrial 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.

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 against order to provide DNA sample — Appeal allowed — Order was issued to destroy DNA sample that was taken — Trial judge erred in failing to exercise discretion not to order DNA sample — Accused was first time offender, in circumstances that resulted in serious injuries, but with no intention of causing those injuries — Accused had otherwise been exemplary citizen, and likelihood of re-offending was remote.

Dewshi, principal of Dewshi Law Practice, tells AdvocateDaily.com that in carrying out the Notice of Proposal and revoking Kamali - Mafroujaki's licence, the reasoning focused on his past conduct, which included: the conduct leading up to his conviction of sexual assault; his denial of responsibility for any of the conduct; and the adverse finding of credibility by the trial judge in the sexual assault case.

The police officers attempted to cover up their behaviour and, despite these outrages, the Crown permitted them remain in court to assist with the prosecution until the trial judge ordered otherwise.

Such relaxation of the application of the rules of evidence also can be seen in jury trials, including where the judge allows prosecution witnesses to testify to otherwise inadmissible hearsay matters after a prosecutor claims s / he will «tie up» the hearsay loose ends with subsequent testimony and evidence.

Sallie Bennett - Jenkins QC is among a line - up of high - profile criminal barristers who will take to the stage this Sunday (29 April) for a charity performance of the Trial of Richard III, presided over by Court of Appeal judge Lady Justice Hallett.

The trial judge also noted, «the worsening of the weather added to the employer's duty» and that duty was not discharged by offering cabs to the employees generally and Sutton Group should have «insisted on her leaving her keys at the office or on her taking a taxi» or should have called her husband to pick her up.

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?

A Deputy Small Claims Court Judge who made the decision to allow a trial to continue on its second day notwithstanding that one of the parties failed to show up has been overturned by the Divisional Court.

A trial judge in Pearson's divorce also denied his motion seeking responses to 248 requests for admissions and ordered him to pay $ 12,000 in legal fees to VanLowe because he was «substantially responsible for «excessive driving up» of the legal costs by «threatening both wife and her lawyer with disbarment» and creating unnecessary litigation,» the appeals ruling stated.

Maryland caselaw allows the trial judge to run that entire jury questioning show, except that Maryland judges often will permit the parties to ask some follow - up questions to individual potential jurors.

While the employee had argued that he had been placed in the «untenable position» of either having to forego his bonus of almost $ 330,000 and keep his job, or sue to recover the bonus amount and lose his job, the trial judge pointed out that the employee had other options outside of these two avenues, including going to arbitration, or following up on the CFO's suggestion that the company might be able to pay a bonus if the other investors in the Ellersie lands agreed.

A Pennsylvania Superior court held that a trial judge did not violate the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) by refusing to split up a plaintiff's wrongful death and survival claims arising out of the death of a nursing home resident.

Torts: Medmal Ediger v. Johnston (B.C.C.A., May 30, 2011)(34408) Apr. 4, 2013 The trial judge was correct to find an obstetrician was negligent in the circumstances here by failing to ensure back - up surgical C - section staff would be immediately available.

we noted one of the signs of the coming Legal Profession Apocalypse, namely that a California federal court judge, without any provocation or precipitating incident whatsoever, ordered opposing counsels in a trial to preemptively draw up a «civility code» under which they would conduct themselves.

Apparently fed up with judges who sit on decisions for ever and ever, the government in Guyana is bringing in legislation, the Judicial Decisions Bill, that will place a 120 day absolute limit on how long after the conclusion of a civil trial a judge may take to release the decision.

A case in which a former client is self - represented is a nightmare to deal with at trial from a practical perspective for a judge, screws up the judge's calendar if the trial has to be delayed to allow a new lawyer to get up to speed after being hired, and is also much more prone to lead to reversible error that could cause the case to be overturned on appeal.

Mota from the very outset of his evidence, the trial judge was not merely posing questions to clear up some ambiguity in his testimony, or focusing Cst.

At the case management conference in June, which also doubled up as a preliminary injunction application, we were able to convince the judge to order a speedy trial to be heard in September.

The Respondent claimed the trial judge erred by failing to allot 50 % of the trial to the Indian asset issues; by relying on an affidavit of an employee of the Appellant's counsel in finding that the Appellant had made proper disclosure, without allowing the Respondent an opportunity to contradict it; by failing to order the Appellant to pay child and spousal support; and by failing to properly allot the time taken up by each party on the issues raised at trial and their respective success on those issues.

Likewise, it might feel overpowering to speak up in front of judge and jury during a trial.

The appeals panel also ruled that Adwent's claim that the trial judge should have instructed the jury on contributory negligence also did not hold up because there was no reason to think doing so would have had any impact on the jury.