Does the trial court abuse its discretion by failing to properly conduct its duty of care and attention to the facts of the case?

California, United States of America

The following excerpt is from People v. Tonche, B277884 (Cal. App. 2018):

The trial court did not abuse its discretion, but even if we were to conclude that it did, we would still affirm. Any error was harmless, and not prejudicial. Error is prejudicial "only when the court, 'after an examination of the entire cause, including the evidence,' is of the 'opinion' that it is reasonably probable that a result more favorable to the appealing party would have been reached in the absence of the error." (People v. Watson (1956) 46 Cal.2d 818, 836.)

"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Try it today free of charge!

The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.

Other Questions

Is there any case law where the trial court would have exercised its discretion not to award a motion for damages even if the trial judge was aware of the fact that the motion was being brought before the court? (California, United States of America)

In a sexual assault case, how have the courts dealt with claims that the trial court abused its discretion in excluding evidence of the victim's other sexual conduct? (California, United States of America)

On appeal, if the trial court improperly failed to instruct on a lesser included offense, does the court have to re-examine the facts of the case? (California, United States of America)

In a sexual assault case, what is the test for a plaintiff's claim that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in excluding evidence of the victim's other sexual conduct? (California, United States of America)

Is there any case law where the trial court would have exercised its discretion not to award a motion for damages even if the trial judge was aware of the fact that the motion is invalid? (California, United States of America)

Does the fact that a jury found that an employee of an airport subjected him to an adverse employment action is sufficient to establish that the trial court abused its discretion in denying him a motion for a new trial? (California, United States of America)

Does a motion for a new trial need to be denied because the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion for new trial? (California, United States of America)

Does the trial court abuse its discretion by failing to properly consider the nature and circumstances of appellant's criminal record? (California, United States of America)

When a defendant makes a mid-trial motion to revoke his self represented status and have standby counsel appointed for the remainder of the trial, does the trial court have a duty to manage the trial? (California, United States of America)

Does Defendant have a claim that the trial court abused its discretion to treat Defendant as a "defendant" in a medical malpractice case? (California, United States of America)

Does the trial court abuse its discretion by failing to properly conduct its duty of care and attention to the facts of the case?

"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Other Questions

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.

Company

Product

Resources