Case Title: State v. Durenleau

Citation: 

Docket Number: 

State: vermont

Court: Vermont Supreme Court

Date: 1994-01-06T00:00:00Z

Document:
State v. Durenleau  ENTRY_ORDER.93-168; 161 Vt. 602; 657 A.2d 170 [Filed 06-Jan-1994] ENTRY ORDER SUPREME COURT DOCKET NO. 93-168 DECEMBER TERM, 1993 State of Vermont } APPEALED FROM: } } v. } District Court of Vermont, } Unit No. 2, Chittenden Circuit } Rebecca S. Durenleau } DOCKET NO. 1338-4-92Cncr In the above entitled cause the Clerk will enter: Defendant's alternative motion to remand is denied. Defendant first must bring her motion for new trial before the trial court. After the trial court has considered defendant's claim of newly discovered evidence, the court may either deny the motion or certify to this Court its intention to grant the motion. If the trial court makes the latter certification to this Court, at that time, this Court would consider a new motion to remand by the defendant. See United States v. Cronic, 466 U.S. 648 , 667 n.42 (1984) (detailing procedure under identical terms of Fed. R. Crim. P. 33); see also 3 C. Wright, Federal Practice & Procedure { 557, at 338-40 (2d ed. 1982 & Supp. 1993) (discussing procedure under Fed. R. Crim. P. 33 and collecting cases). BY THE COURT: _______________________________________ Frederic W. Allen, Chief Justice _______________________________________ Ernest W. Gibson III, Associate Justice _______________________________________ John A. Dooley, Associate Justice _______________________________________ James L. Morse, Associate Justice [x] Publish _______________________________________ [ ] Do Not Publish Denise R. Johnson, Associate Justice