Court Opinion

ID: 9719313
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 07:48:34.405699+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:24:05.931522
License: Public Domain

ASHBY, J.
I respectfully dissent. I would disapprove the procedure used by the trial court in which it did not announce its decision at the *922conclusion of the trial and did not make any showing of need to take the cases under submission. However, there also is no showing whatsoever that the procedure followed was anything but harmless in these instances. Defendants were present during their trials and all testified. The evidence against them was substantial. In the case of defendant Kriss, even he testified that he had exceeded the 55-mile-per-hour maximum speed limit as charged. To hold that these convictions must be reversed and dismissed regardless of the fairness of the trials and the weight of the evidence and the absence of any showing that the pronouncement of the judgment and sentencing would have made any difference, is excessive and unjust.
Contrary to the implication of the majority there is no necessity for retrials. If, for appearance sake as suggested by the majority, pronouncement of the judgment and sentencing before the defendants have left the courtroom are essential, then these cases should be remanded to the trial court for compliance with those requirements.