How Does Motion for New Trial Georgia Work?
Explore expert legal advice on filing a motion for new trial Georgia. Learn about requirements, procedures, and potential outcomes for your case.
Grounds for a New Trial
Typically, the success of these requests requires demonstrating that the trial court failed to uphold the defendant’s right to a fair trial. These motions are reviewed by the trial judge, not an appellate judge. As such, convincing the judge of their mistake can be challenging.
The grounds for a new trial include a case where the final judgment entered thereon is inconsistent with the trial evidence and opposed to the statutes controlling the trial issues. The purpose of a move for a new trial is to revisit the issues and verdict returned by the trial court during the initial trial.
New trials are challenging to win, but they can be won if the trial defendant presents evidence of serious errors or new exculpatory evidence. A judge may grant a new trial based on the following grounds:
- The verdict returned goes against the evidence and violates justice.
- The verdict returned is against the weight of the evidence presented.
- The trial court committed an error through an illegal admission or exclusion of evidence.
- Presence of newly discovered evidence.
- Other justifications as per the judge’s discretion.
Occasionally, a motion for a new trial will be granted if a grave injustice occurred during the initial trial. This may involve proof of bias or prejudice on the part of jury members, undermining the defendant’s right to a fair trial by jury.
In other instances, a judge may grant a new trial based on injustice if the trial judge or trial prosecution failed to respect the defendant’s constitutional rights. Moreover, the prosecution cannot typically use the defendant’s exercise of their right to remain silent against them.
The evidence may also indicate that the defendant was stopped from testifying due to threats or manipulation. This may warrant a new trial. Generally, the court will consider whether your constitutional rights were violated during your trial.
An appeal is not a new trial. While these two processes may look alike, the following are some differences between the two:
During a new trial, the defendant gets to present evidence such as images, documents, witness testimony, expert views, forensic evidence, phone records, and more.
A judge presides over jury trials, in which a group of 12 jurors determines your case based on the facts. In trials without a jury, sometimes called “bench trials,” the judge presides over the proceedings and renders the judgment.
A panel of judges reviews your trial during an appeal. You cannot submit new evidence or call new witnesses since no jury exists. The judges will only consider the evidence given during the initial trial.
In most instances, the judges will not dispute the trial’s facts unless the evidence presented directly contradicts the verdict. They mostly either affirm or reverse the decision of the trial court. A case is generally remanded (sent back) to the trial court if the appellate court reverses a decision.
To request an appeal, your attorney will file a notice in the court where your case was initially heard stating that you want the Court of Appeals to examine your case. When transferring your case to the Court of Appeals, your attorney will submit a brief detailing any instances of error or carelessness and how they affected your case.
Throughout this procedure, attorneys are occasionally called upon to provide oral arguments. Yet, it is considerably more typical for the decision to be based only on the arguments. This may be a reason to consider working with an attorney with experience producing persuasive briefs.