Because the images can easily be changed from the original, and there is no negative to which they can be compared.
Evidence presented in court is not retained by the court. After the trial is concluded it is returned to the agency (agencies) that supplied it. If you need access to any of it you will have subpoena the agency to release them. If the case is still on-going (in trial, under appeal, etc), evidence in an ongoing case is never released. Your defense attorney had access to the same material, have you checked with them?
A "Mapp" hearing is a pre-trial hearing on whether or not to suppress a piece of evidence that is going to be introduced at trial. The evidence could be tangible evidence, such as an illegal substance, or intangible evidence, such as a confession.
Police photography basically deals with forensic photography. In most cases, it deals with a scene of a crime while the term 'photography' generally mean anything that deals with pictures. Hope that helps...
Photography is used at crime scenes to preserve the natural evidence. For example: if person J was shot in the stomach, but was place laying on the bullet wound, the CSI, person M, would take a picture of how the body lay and how the items were placed around the body before turning it over. Thus, they have photographic evidence.
The Defendant's character in and of itself is not on trial during a criminal proceeding. Whether or not the defendant is kind of a jerk or known for being dishonest is not evidence that he committed the crime at question, and is generally inadmissible. However, the defendant may open the door for the prosecution to introduce evidence of his bad character. For example, if the defendant is charged with embezzling funds, and the defendant introduces character evidence to show that he is a generally honest person, the prosecution may then rebut that evidence by introducing evidence that the defendant is a liar.
USUALLY A TRIAL COURT IS WHEN SOMEONE IS TAKEN TO COURT FOR SOME REASON OR ANOTHER. THE APPELLATE COURT IS WHEN YOU WANT TO APPEAL A DECISION THAT WAS MADE BY THE JUDGE A trial court hears testimony, examines evidence, rules on the admissibility of evidence and objections of trial counsel, issues a judgment on the case, and imposes sentence or penalties/awards. A trial court may also impanel juries and give them instructions for deliberating. An appellate court only reviews the decisions of lower courts, which include trial courts and in some cases lower appellate courts. They do not hear testimony or examine new evidence. They only review the record of the lower court, and may hear oral arguments from the attorneys involved in the appeal. An appellate court may uphold the decision of the trial court, or return the case to the trial court for reconsideration or a new trial.
Evidence of a crime can be used regardless of where it is recovered from.
If the trial is/was still in progress there is no appeal of the trial judge's decision to admit the drug evidence. However, once ythe trial has been completed and the verdict rendered, if the defendant feels there are valid legal grounds to challenge the trial, he may file an appeal with the Court of Appeals.
No, an appellate court may not hear new evidence. The power of the appellate court is strictly to review the record of the trial court to determine whether any errors that would affect the outcome of the case were committed. If the appellate court felt that there was insufficient evidence to support the trial court judgement, it will reverse the judgment rather than call for new evidence. If the appellate court feels that evidence was improperly excluded from the trial, it could reverse the trial court decision and remand it for a retrial with a direction that the new evidence be admitted on rehearing. IN either event the appellate will not act as a trial court and hear new evidence.
It depends on the reason for the translation. Your own translation of your documents will not be accepted as evidence in a court trial. You will need an independent translation by a professional.It depends on the reason for the translation. Your own translation of your documents will not be accepted as evidence in a court trial. You will need an independent translation by a professional.It depends on the reason for the translation. Your own translation of your documents will not be accepted as evidence in a court trial. You will need an independent translation by a professional.It depends on the reason for the translation. Your own translation of your documents will not be accepted as evidence in a court trial. You will need an independent translation by a professional.
If the trial is/was still in progress there is no appeal of the trial judge's decision to admit the drug evidence. However, once ythe trial has been completed and the verdict rendered, if the defendant feels there are valid legal grounds to challenge the trial, he may file an appeal with the Court of Appeals.
Take it with you. The judge will ask you questions and, if you need your evidence, show it to him then.
The term you are looking for is "trial." During a trial, evidence is presented and examined to determine the guilt or innocence of the accused.
To start, much of the evidence must be backed up with factual evidence, so that the circumstancial evidence is minimal.
Evidence presented in court is not retained by the court. After the trial is concluded it is returned to the agency (agencies) that supplied it. If you need access to any of it you will have subpoena the agency to release them. If the case is still on-going (in trial, under appeal, etc), evidence in an ongoing case is never released. Your defense attorney had access to the same material, have you checked with them?
The appellate system reviews decisions made by the trial court. For example, suppose a trial court grants a motion to allow certain evidence at trial. The person who did not want the evidence to come in can file an appeal with the appellate courts asking them to determine whether the trial judge should or should not have allowed the evidence in question.
The Court can enter a JNOV, if the evidence presented is insufficient to support the verdict as a matter of law. One of the parties may appeal. If there is a legal defect in the trial, the appellate court may reverse the verdict and require the trial court to have a new trial.