Motions on Appeal

[Misreprented]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Cal.

Isn't motions on appeal suppose to be responded to by the opposing party?

 

[Ronin]

Motions on appeal are occasionally ignored. If an attorney feels the motion is frivolous or has no chance of success, such as one filed by a pro se appellant, it may be ignored, avoiding unnecesary expense to their client.

The only response that an appeals court generally expects is for a reply brief to be filed if the appellant filed a brief. But even then, failing to file a reply brief does not mean the appeals court will rule in favor of the appellant.

 

[Misreprented]

Motions on appeal are occasionally ignored. If an attorney feels the motion is frivolous or has no chance of success, such as one filed by a pro se appellant, it may be ignored, avoiding unnecesary expense to their client.

Can it also be to oppose a motion in rare and certain cases would be to open Pandora’s box of factual issues that is best left untouched.

 

[Ronin]

Can it also be to oppose a motion in rare and certain cases would be to open Pandora’s box of factual issues that is best left untouched.

Nope.

The only facts the appeals court will consider are those already in the record with the lower court.

 

[Ronin]

Can it also be to oppose a motion in rare and certain cases would be to open Pandora’s box of factual issues that is best left untouched.

Nope.

The only factual issues the appeals court will consider are those already in the record with the lower court.

 

[Misreprented]

Let’s just say that the “cetnral and factual issue” being raised is an issue that the lower court refused to consider which will prevent an adequate and effective review of appeal on the merits of appellants claims.

 

[Ronin]

Let’s just say that the “cetnral and factual issue” being raised is an issue that the lower court refused to consider which will prevent an adequate and effective review of appeal on the merits of appellants claims.

Then the appellant would need to show that an attempt was made to introduce the evidence in the lower court, the court did not allow the evidence, the appellant made a proper and timely objection to this, and the court overruled the objection.

 

[Misreprented]

Then the appellant would need to show that an attempt was made to introduce the evidence in the lower court, the court did not allow the evidence, the appellant made a proper and timely objection to this, and the court overruled the objection.

What if the appellant did not physically have posession of the evidence but produced substantive evidence of who posses and where it was at, which resulted in appeal. In otherwords not having this record caused the adverse judgment

 

[Zigner]

What if the appellant did not physically have posession of the evidence but produced substantive evidence of who posses and where it was at, which resulted in appeal. In otherwords not having this record caused the adverse judgment

So you want to appeal because the court didn't consider evidence that was never presented?

 

[latigo]

Do you suppose you might state what is on your mind rather than gnawing around the edges with this “let’s just say” and “Pandora’s box” business. You know, like for example ask a sensible question about appellate rules and procedures, because you have yet to do so.
___________________

You write that the “lower court refused to consider” certain “central and factual issues”. How has the appellant assigned error to that refusal?

1. Error in law because the trial court refused to allow appellant’s proposed evidence to establish these “central and factual issues”? (In which case did appellant make an offer of proof of that evidence to establish a record that can be reviewed on appeal?)

If so, what is appellant’s legal argument that the court committed error in not allowing that evidence?

2. Was appellant’s evidence admitted into the trial record and error is assignment to the court’s failure to find such evidence persuasive as to what appellant perceives as the “central and factual issues”?

Are you aware that if the appeal is directed to errors in the court’s factual findings, that the appellate panel will not weigh the evidence, but only look for any substantial evidence that will support the lower court’s findings?

In that case, the question is was any substantial evidence introduced that will support the lower court. Is there any?

 

[Misreprented]

What type of substantial evidence will the appellate panel consider to support the lower court’s findings? Would the appellate panel review procedural and statutory procedures leading to the judgment that is appealed ?

 

[latigo]

Substantial evidence would be evidence that has relevant significance or meaning that reasonable minds could accept as credible to support a conclusion without resort to speculation or conjecture.

Your second question is legal gibberish. The appellate court will review the trial record in light of the assignments of error.

 

[Ronin]

In most civil cases, if the lower court had at least "some evidence" to support its ruling, the appeals court will not overturn the rulings. Appeals courts will almost always refuse to second guess a lower courts findings on the relative weight of the evidence.

 

[Misreprented]

In most civil cases, if the lower court had at least "some evidence" to support its ruling, the appeals court will not overturn the rulings. Appeals courts will almost always refuse to second guess a lower courts findings on the relative weight of the evidence.

Question is it considered significant where defendant was convicted of a higher non-included offense not originally charged?
Would a defendant be required to replea once the complaint was amended to face a more serious seperate newly filed charge.

 

[latigo]

You’ve posted six times in this thread and have yet to reveal one decipherable issue sent up on this supposed "appeal".

Clearly, you aren’t looking for legal advice. What you are doing in here is seeking attention and trying to hold an ever increasingly uninterested audience with jail-house-lawyer gibberish.