FACTOID # 87: 22% of American women aged 20 gave birth while in their teens. In Switzerland and Japan, only 2% did so.
 
 Home   Encyclopedia   Statistics   Countries A-Z   Flags   Maps   Education   Forum   FAQ   About 
 
WHAT'S NEW
RECENT ARTICLES
More Recent Articles »
 

FACTS & STATISTICS    Simple view

  1. Select countries to view: (hold down Control key and click to select several)

     

     

    Compare:

     

     

  1. Select fact or statistic: (* = graphable)

     

     

     

  2. (OPTIONAL) Compare to statistic: (both need to be graphable)

     

     

     

  3. View result as:

     

       
(OR) SEARCH ALL encyclopedia, stats & forums:   

Encyclopedia > Reversible error

Reversible error in an error by the trier of law (judge) or the trier of fact (jury - or again the judge if it is a bench trial) or malfeasance by one of the trying attorneys which results in an unfair trial. It is to be distinguished from errors that do not rise to a level that bring the validity of the judgment into question and thus do not lead to a reversal upon appeal.


Technically, attorney misconduct is not reversible error. Failure of the judge to remedy it during the trial is reversible error. In cases such as unfairly or illegally concealing evidence, there is no error on the part of the court but the court's decision may still be vacated and the matter returned for a new trial, because there is no other way for justice to be done.


  Results from FactBites:
 
Reversible error - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (283 words)
Reversible error in an error by the trier of law (judge) or the trier of fact (jury - or again the judge if it is a bench trial) or malfeasance by one of the trying attorneys which results in an unfair trial.
If an appellate court determines that reversible error occurred, it must reverse the judgment of the lower court and order a new trial on such terms and conditions as are found to be just.
Failure of the judge to remedy it during the trial is reversible error.
69785-0 - State of Washington V. Jacob Patrick Brown v. State of Washington V. Marshall C. Harris (2615 words)
We recently affirmed, 'when assessing the impact of an instructional error, reversal is automatic unless the error ''is trivial, or formal, or merely academic, and was not prejudicial to the substantial rights of the party assigning it, and in no way affected the final outcome of the case.''' State v.
Thus, we held it was error to submit the instruction based on the Pinkerton doctrine because the latter improperly relieved the state of its burden to prove the defendant knew his actions would promote or facilitate the commission of the crime committed by his coconspirators.
Reversal is required in spite of other evidence against the defendants, when as here, one of the theories on which the state tried its case was legally deficient because we cannot presume 'the verdict was reached under the correct instruction.' Stein, 144 Wn.2d at 247.
  More results at FactBites »


 

COMMENTARY     


Share your thoughts, questions and commentary here
Your name
Your comments
Please enter the 5-letter protection code

Want to know more?
Search encyclopedia, statistics and forums:

 


Lesson Plans | Student Area | Student FAQ | Reviews | Press Releases |  Feeds | Contact
The Wikipedia article included on this page is licensed under the GFDL.
Images may be subject to relevant owners' copyright.
All other elements are (c) copyright NationMaster.com 2003-5. All Rights Reserved.
Usage implies agreement with terms.