California Court of Appeal

In this case, a jury convicted defendant of first degree murder and conspiracy to commit the murder, and the prosecution's case relied in large part on the testimony of an accomplice. Following the guilty verdict, the trial court granted defendant's motion for a new trial and subsequently granted defendant's motion for dismissal on grounds that double jeopardy barred retrial. The trial court orders are affirmed, where: 1) the trial court ruled that there was insufficient evidence as a matter of law, and this ruling constituted an acquittal, but because the acquittal occurred after the jury's guilty verdict, the trial court's orders are appealable; 2) double jeopardy principles do not bar appellate review of the dismissal order or the new trial order; 3) when the evidence corroborating the accomplice's testimony about the circumstances of the crimes is combined with the evidence relating to defendant, there is still nothing that tends to implicate defendant by relating to an act that is an element of the crimes; and 4) if a trial court rules that the evidence is insufficient as a matter of law, then the ruling bars retrial.

Appellate Information

• Decided 11/14/2014
• Published 11/14/2014

Judges

• Bigelow

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel