Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

90 Cal. 174

People v. Brooks

California Supreme Court

Decided July 6, 1891

California Supreme Court · decided 1891-07-06

<p>Criminal Law—New Trial — Order Granting—Discretion—Conflicting Evidence — Record upon Appeal. —The granting of a motion for a new trial in a criminal cause is within the sound discretion of the trial court; and when one of the grounds upon which it is asked is that the verdict is contrary to the evidence, an order granting the motion will not he reversed, unless the record clearly shows that there was no evidence which conflicted with that upon which the verdict rested.</p>

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1891-07-06

How this case has been cited

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently January 1940

4 state decisions

20189119001910192019301940decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

The Court.

¶1— A motion for a new trial in a criminal cause is very largely addressed to the discretion of the court before which the trial was had; and when one of the grounds upon which it is asked is that the verdict is contrary to the evidence given in the cause, the action of that court in granting the motion will not be reversed by this court, unless the record clearly shows that there was no evidence which conflicted with that upon which the verdict rested. In the present case the action of the court in granting the motion is fully sustained by the *175matters contained in the bill of exceptions, both upon the foregoing ground, and also upon the ground of newly discovered evidence contained in the affidavits offered upon the motion on the part of the defendant.

¶2The order is affirmed.

/90/cal/174 · .json · Public domain