What is the appellant's burden to affirmatively demonstrate that the court was unaware of or/or failed to consider the factors set out in rule 4.414?

California, United States of America


The following excerpt is from People v. Thompson, (Cal. App. 2013):

On appeal, it is the appellant's burden to affirmatively demonstrate error. (People v. Battle (2011) 198 Cal.App.4th 50, 62 (Battle); rule 4.409 ["Relevant criteria enumerated in [the rules of court] ... will be deemed to have been considered unless the record affirmatively reflects otherwise"].) None of the factors cited by appellant affirmatively establishes the court was unaware of and/or failed to consider the factors set forth in rule 4.414. Indeed, as indicated above, the record suggests quite the opposite. Appellant has not met her burden of affirmatively demonstrating the error she asserts.

Other Questions


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)
What is the appellant's burden of demonstrating prejudicial error to the appellate 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, does the appellate court have power to 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)
What is the appellate court's role in determining whether a defendant satisfied his burden of producing clear and convincing evidence in 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)
How have courts considered a defendant's claim that the court erred in failing to stay a sentence pursuant to section 654 of the Criminal Code? (California, United States of America)
Is a defendant's claim that the court should have deleted reference to irrelevant mitigating factors from the instructions given to the jury regarding the aggravating and mitigating factors to be considered in determining the appropriate penalty? (California, United States of America)
Does the court correct the prosecutor in the context of a penalty for failing to consider the relevant aggravating and mitigating factors in a motor vehicle accident case? (California, United States of America)
Is an appeal moot when, through no fault of the appellant, an event occurs which makes it impossible for the reviewing court to provide any effective relief to the appellant even when ruling in the appellant's favor? (California, United States of America)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.