Sentences with phrase «verdict by jurors»

Rebekah Brooks, the former editor of the News Of The World tabloid, was cleared of the phone - hacking charge in a unanimous verdict by jurors.

The appeals court rejected Sienkowski's argument, holding that under Indiana law a party can not attack the validity of a verdict by juror testimony about jury deliberations unless it relates to (1) drug or alcohol use by any juror, (2) the question of whether extraneous prejudicial information was improperly brought to the jury's attention or (3) whether any outside influence was improperly brought to bear upon any juror.

Not exact matches

Despite the lengthy deliberations, jurors said they did not feel pressured by the judge to arrive at a verdict, and they were not influenced by unusual distractions, ranging from the length of deliberations to Leitza's departure to attend the wedding to the highly visible and vocal group of midwife advocates who attended the trial.

It took jurors less than 90 minutes to reach a verdict in the eight - week corruption trial of ex-NYC Councilman Dan Halloran that was marked by delays, a mistrial for a co-defendant — state Sen. Malcolm Smith — and several juror dismissals for personal reasons.

A list of the questions asked by the jury to the judge includes one example in which they asked if a juror can «come to a verdict based on a reason that was not presented in court and has no facts or evidence to support it».

Most jurors didn't speak after the verdict, but Arleen Phillips, 53, of Mount Vernon, said she was the lone juror who initially thought Silver was not guilty but was eventually swayed by Silver's failure to fully reveal his law - firm referral money on state disclosure forms.

According to an affidavit filed by one of the jurors after the trial, the jury unanimously agreed that the plaintiff, Martha Sienkowski, should be awarded $ 336,300 but «we had trouble trying to figure out the verdict form, and sent a note through the bailiff to that effect seeking further instructions.»

By polling the jury, with your eyes firmly fixed on those of each juror, staring intently and transmitting your telepathic message to speak out, tell the court that you don't agree with the verdict, let the world know that the verdict is wrong, you give the defendant one final chance to break free of the conviction.

A unanimous verdict is required in federal court, but in Idaho courts a verdict must be agreed to by 3 / 4ths of the jurors.

In its 5 - 4 decision in Philip Morris v. Mayola Williams, Justice Breyer, writing for the majority, held that the jury's verdict violated the Due Process clause of the Constitution because jurors had been permitted to consider harm suffered by other smokers, who weren't parties to the case, in assessing punitive damages.

«Today we announce no hard and fast rule that all such types of internet research by a juror prior to trial without notice to the court and counsel automatically doom a jury's verdict.

Several well - publicized cases exemplify how trial consulting made a significant difference by seeking to understand and satisfy jurors» needs, and to resolve their dilemmas in reaching a verdict.

This landmark case firmly grounded in English common law rights that were carried overseas by the colonists, including freedoms of religion, speech, and assembly, as well as the fundamental right of jurors to render a general verdict based on conscience, including setting aside the law when a just verdict requires it.

This is jury nullification too and the jurors are protected by the first rule, though the second doesn't apply and judges have the power to overrule a guilty verdict if they think the jurors are... nt the best.

1 For attempts to measure the effect of advocacy quality through other means, see, e.g., Banks Miller et al., Leveling the Odds: The Effect of Quality Legal Representation in Cases of Asymmetrical Capability, 49 Law & Soc» y Rev. 209 (2015)(finding that high quality representation evened the odds for asylum applicants and that asylum seekers fared better when unrepresented than when represented by a poor lawyer); Mitchell J. Frank & Dr. Osvaldo F. Morera, Professionalism and Advocacy at Trial — Real Jurors Speak in Detail About the Performance of Their Advocates, 64 Baylor L. Rev. 1, 38 (2012)(finding statistically significant correlations in criminal cases between jurors» perceptions of closing argument persuasiveness and jury verdict, and finding statistically significant correlations in civil cases between perceptions of defense counsel's closing argument persuasiveness and defense verdict); James M. Anderson & Paul Heaton, How Much Difference Does the Lawyer Make?

Not only were the jurors confused by the verdict form, but they actually came back with inconsistent verdicts and damages awards, e.g., awarding damages of $ 2 million on a patent they found not - infringed, and had to be sent back by the judge to resolve the inconsistencies.

In refusing to convict Penn, the jurors refused to enforce what they knew to be unjust law, even when directed by the judge to return a Guilty verdict, and even when imprisoned for their act of conscience.

Indeed, no one, including the judge, is even supposed to be aware of the views of individual jurors during deliberations, because a jury's independence is best guaranteed by secret deliberations, such that jurors may «return a verdict freely according to their conscience» and their «conduct in the jury room [may be] untrammeled by the fear of embarrassing publicity.»

37 It cited Wikipedia itself as to how it is «openly editable,» as well as a number of federal court decisions «troubled by Wikipedia's lack of reliability» and ultimately concluded the government could not show there was «no reasonable possibility» that the jury's verdict was not impacted by the internet research.38 At least one federal court has followed Lawson to set aside another jury verdict based on a juror's research on the IRS website, which, although equally beyond the scope of the evidence at trial, is undoubtedly more reliable than a website like Wikipedia.39

There was a real possibility that she would have been influenced by those factors in reaching her verdict, and there was no doubt that the fair - minded informed observed would have concluded that there was a real possibility that the biased juror had influenced her fellow jurors.

Thank you for your interest in the independent juror's role in protecting human rights and safeguarding justice, and in the educational work of the Fully Informed Jury Association to inform everyone of jurors» traditional, legal authority to conscientiously acquit by jury nullification when a just verdict requires it.

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 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.