Is there a presumption that a trial court knows and applies the correct statutory and case law?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Medina, B249059 (Cal. App. 2015):
We presume that the trial court "knows and applies the correct statutory and case law [citation] and is able to . . . recognize those facts which properly may be considered in the judicial decision making process. [Citations.]" (People v. Coddington (2000) 23 Cal.4th 529, 644.) Barrios has not overcome that presumption. His claim fails.
9. Presentence custody
"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.
Other Questions
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 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 Attorney General have any concerns that the trial court did not apply the correct standard of conduct in the context of Section 47 of the California Civil Code? (California, United States of America)
In a motion for a new trial, is the trial court bound by the same principles as the court of appeal? (California, United States of America)
On appeal from the denial of a motion for acquittal, does the reviewing court apply the same standard as the trial court? (California, United States of America)
Whether a court's ruling is based on oral testimony or written declarations, when conflicting inferences can reasonably be drawn from the facts, can the appellate court defer to the trial court's factual determinations? (California, United States of America)
What is the standard of review applied by appellate courts to a decision by a trial court to instruct or not to instruct a jury? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for determining whether the trial court applied the correct legal standard? (California, United States of America)
When a factual determination is challenged by an appellate court on the grounds that there is no substantial evidence to sustain it, can the appellate court substitute its deductions for those of the trial court? (California, United States of America)
When a factual determination is challenged by an appellate court on the grounds that there is no substantial evidence to sustain it, can the appellate court substitute its deductions for those of the trial court? (California, United States of America)
