If you are convicted at a trial by jury, but during the trial a piece of information(a recording) is submitted and listened to by all sides yet is not accepted or submitted as evidance. Can this piece of evidance be used as new Evidance to force an appeal trial IF its pertinant OR is it a moot point as it has already been suggested once in trial?
Update: The information was presented to all parties then asked if the defence council wanted to admit it into Evidance but the defence lawyer refused it, yet the judge insinuated it might be arguable if it was used....
Update 2: The information was a conversation between the accusor and his lawyer and it was infered that there might be grounds to infer that the accusers lawyer implanted the idea of accusing the defended into the plot of the crime making the defendent into a co conspirator... the conversation was questionable so said the judge.
Update:this is the question of evidance NOT if the evidance will be weighed at the appeal or any such thing. The appeal could be based on new found evidance BUT my question is IF evidance that was not used at the origianl trial can be used as new found evidance since it was never submitted?
Update 3:your not a paralegal or you would have read the entire question and seen it was NOT DISALLOWED. It was offered and turned down by defence... Dissallowed mean the judge ruled on it.. HE DID NOT.. I hate kids that think they know to much.
Answers & Comments
Verified answer
You don't "force" an appeal. A person convicted of a crime has a right to appeal in every state, although there are time limits upon when a notice of appeal must be filed. I think what you may be asking is whether there are any grounds upon which an appeal might be based.
The erroneous exclusion of evidence can be a ground for appeal if admission of the evidence could have led to a different verdict. However, from your statement it appears that the judge did not exclude the evidence: your lawyer decided not to offer it in evidence. In such a case the judge cannot be said to have made an error.
Maybe you are claiming that your attorney erred in not asking that the evidence be admitted. Egregious errors by defense attorneys can be a basis for attacking a judgment if those errors would have affected the judgment, because that is a denial of the constitutional right to effective counsel. The procedures for raising ineffective assistance of counsel vary between the states.
Newly discovered evidence can be a basis for a later challenge to a judgment, but usually only if it proves innocence. However, if the evidence was available at the time of trial it is NOT newly discovered.
If you have some other question, you are going to have to state it more clearly.
It was disallowed so stop calling it evidence. It was never entered into the record as evidence and no, you cannot "try again". In fact, it is not grounds for an appeal because it is NOT "new evidence". It is not even evidence. It was presented and disallowed. Give it up. Go to jail. Do not collect $200.
An appeal is not a trial and the facts, whatever they are, are not a part of it.