What is the test for a reasonable interpretation of evidence at a tribunal?

California, United States of America

The following excerpt is from People v. Slaughter, 200 Cal.Rptr. 448, 35 Cal.3d 629, 677 P.2d 854 (Cal. 1984):

30 When several interpretations of evidence appear reasonable to a reviewing court, it is often impossible for that court to state with confidence from a cold record which interpretation actually is the "more reasonable." Factors that can be extremely probative in making this determination are often unavailable to judges reviewing transcripts. (See, e.g., Meiner v. Ford Motor Co. (1971) 17 Cal.App.3d 127, 140-141, 94 Cal.Rptr. 702.) This is a principal reason why the choice among reasonable interpretations is normally the exclusive function of the tribunal hearing live testimony.

"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

What is the test for evidence that the appellant could reasonably reasonably reasonably expect the appellant to have knowledge of a crime? (California, United States of America)

When a conviction for sexual assault is based primarily on circumstantial evidence, does the court have to presume every fact the trier could reasonably deduce from the evidence? (California, United States of America)

Can a defense interpreter only interpret words of the witness interpreter at trial? (California, United States of America)

Does a defendant have a duty to accept the only interpretation of the circumstantial evidence that "appears to be reasonable"? (California, United States of America)

Does a competent, unconflicted counsel who submitted on the evidence at the preliminary hearing, should have argued to the trial court that this evidence did not establish the lawful duty element beyond a reasonable doubt? (California, United States of America)

Does the absence of lingering doubt from a recitation of evidence the defense offered in an attempt to raise reasonable doubt raise a reasonable doubt? (California, United States of America)

How have courts interpreted the rule of reasonableness in the context of the reasonable use doctrine? (California, United States of America)

What is the difference between a reasonable and unreasonable plaintiff and a reasonable plaintiff under a "reasonable implied assumption of risk" approach? (California, United States of America)

Is a jury's duty to acquit a defendant if it finds the circumstantial evidence susceptible of two reasonable interpretations? (California, United States of America)

Does the evidence support the finding that there was insufficient evidence to support a finding that the sexual assault charges against Backman were not supported by the weight of the evidence? (California, United States of America)

What is the test for a reasonable interpretation of evidence at a tribunal?

"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Other Questions

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.

Company

Product

Resources