How has the court treated a motion to reconsider a motion for a new trial based on newly discovered evidence?
The following excerpt is from U.S. v. Hearst, 563 F.2d 1331 (9th Cir. 1977):
Five days after sentencing, appellant filed a motion for new trial based on newly discovered evidence. The district court denied the motion. United States v. Hearst, 424 F.Supp. 307 (N.D.Cal.1976). More than a month later appellant filed a motion to reconsider, calling the court's attention to the recent case of United States v. McCrane, 547 F.2d 204 (3d Cir. 1976). The district court rejected the motion to reconsider as not timely filed and, in any event, as without merit. United States v. Hearst, 435 F.Supp. 29 (N.D.Cal.1977). This ruling is the subject of appellant's second appeal, No. 77-1759.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
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.
