Court Opinion

ID: 9852146
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 05:25:26.409841+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:22:23.197989
License: Public Domain

SHERAN, Chief Justice
(dissenting).
I would grant a new trial in this case in the interest of justice because of these unique facts:
*412(1) The first jury to hear the evidence in this case could not reach a verdict.
(2) The second jury to consider the evidence did agree, but before doing so advised the court that it could not. The jurors were not polled when the guilty verdict was returned.
(3) The medical testimony disclosed only one sign of injury which, according to the transcript, could have occurred at a point in time after the alleged crime.
(4) In face of defendant’s denial that he had any acquaintance or contact with the complaining witness, the evidence of identification was less certain than one would expect and prefer in a case of this kind.