Herbin v. United States
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
1DissentWagner, Chief Judge
The record reveals that the trial court had no power to grant appellant’s motion for new trial on an “interest of justice” standard, and it did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion based on a claim of newly discovered evidence, even assuming the truth of the claimed “recantation.” See Super. Ct.Crim. R. 33.1 Therefore, no remand is required to dispose of the issues raised on appeal.
Rule 33 requires that any motion for new trial which is not based upon newly discovered evidence be filed within seven days of verdict or finding of guilt.2 Id. This seven-*445day time constraint is a…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Burks v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- United States v. Robert Dibernardo and Theodore RothsteinCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1989
- United States v. Miguel Lara-HernandezCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1978
- Earle v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1992
- Byers v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1994
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.