trial by jury evidance question?
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 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.
More Questions From This User See All
Answers & Comments
As a general rule, new evidence cannot be admitted during an appeal. An appeal pursues one question only: whether the trial court correctly applied the law. If a lawyer fails to bring into evidence a particular piece of evidence; it is not a failure of the court, it is merely the result of hiring an inadequate lawyer. If an important piece of evidence had been wrongly disregarded by the trial court, or if it an inadmissible piece of evidence had been improperly admitted, it can be a basis for an appeal, but the evidence itself is not justification for an appeal.
There are a few special situations, particularly regarding DNA evidence, where statutes have specifically allowed new trials where such evidence was not available at the time of the original trial.
If evidence that has not been acquired legally or accepted is presented at trial, then it would be a mistrial.