Court Opinion

ID: 9755702
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-28 20:47:54.841088+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:28:10.294748
License: Public Domain

QUINN, Associate Judge
(dissenting).
I believe this case should be reversed and remanded for a new trial because I do not think this court has the authority to direct that the trial court enter a judgment of acquittal.
Shortly after this court came into being, the late Chief Judge Groner of the United' States Court of Appeals in the Nolan case1 directed its course in no uncertain terms, and since then we have adhered to that admonishment without exception. He stated' that where the evidence is such that either one of two different conclusions might reasonably be drawn from it, the decision is for the trial court and its judgment must stand, and an appellate court may not rc-weigh the evidence or override the findings except where it clearly appears they are manifestly wrong. We have stated time and time again that our function in a case such as this is merely to determine whether *559in law the evidence is sufficient to sustain the conviction. What the majority has done in effect is to retry the case; based on a record where even the facts are against it, it has determined that a judgment of acquittal should be entered. The record shows that appellant admits he was exceeding the speed limit by some twenty-five miles but based his defense on justifiable fear brought about by the conduct of the officer. From the record, we cannot tell whether this aspect of the case was even considered by the trial judge, and therefore it is my opinion that a new trial should be granted.

. Nolan v. Werth, 79 U.S.App.D.C. 33, 142 F.2d 9 (1944).