What are the principles of a trial court not to abuse its discretion?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. VELEZ, E048360, No. SWF022996 (Cal. App. 2010):
precepts establish that a trial court does not abuse its discretion unless its decision is so irrational or arbitrary that no reasonable person could agree with it." (Id. at pp. 376-377; see also People v. Myers (1999) 69 Cal.App.4th 305, 309.)
"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
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 to exclude prejudicial evidence at trial? (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 the Attorney General's assertion that appellate courts review probation conditions for abuse of abuse of power, if the issue was raised in the trial court? (California, United States of America)
Does a restitution order for abuse of discretion constitute an abuse of the court's discretion? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for an abuse of discretion when a trial court elects an atrial court's election of a lower term? (California, United States of America)
Does the trial court abuse its discretion to exclude prejudicial evidence at trial? (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)
Can a defendant obtain a new trial on the grounds that the trial court did not abuse its discretion to deny the motion on the same grounds as the previous motion? (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)
