**BREAKING**
September 9, 2009
Los Angeles, California
Phillip Spector’s lawyer on appeal, the venerable Dennis P. Riordan of San Francisco, has just filed with the California Court of Appeal for the Second Appellate District a request that the court extend the music producer’s time to file his opening brief on appeal “30 days from the ruling on appellant’s motion to augment the record on appeal.”
We previously posted that on August 8, 2009, Riordan filed a motion to “augment” (supplement) the record on appeal previously transmitted by the Los Angeles Superior Court to the court of appeal July 7, 2009. The “motion to augment,” which is an entirely routine house keeping measure to insure that all parts of the trial court record that Spector’s counsel needs to refer to in the all important factual record provided to the court of appeal, is still pending and awaiting decision.
Such motions, while routine, are nevertheless important, because a criminal appeal in California is not an opportunity to retry the case; the court of appeal may not reweigh the evidence or the credibility of the trial witnesses.
In addition, the factual contentions made by the parties to an appeal must be set forth in the record on appeal (consisting of the transcript of oral proceedings at trial (the so called “reporter’s transcript”) and the written pleadings filed by the attorneys for both sides in the trial court + any relevant orders issued by the trial court (the so called “clerk’s transcript”).
As an appellate attorney might say, “If it is not in the trial court record, it does not exist”.
Indeed, whenever the party to an appeal sets forth a fact in his or her brief, it must be supported by a page citation to the official record on appeal or at best the factual assertion will be disregarded or in egregious cases the court might strike the entire brief.
In addition, any claims of error by the trial court in respect to the ruling on motions to limit or exclude evidence (or other motions made during or after trial-such as a request for post conviction bail) must be supported by producing the transcript of the hearing on the motion, all of the papers filled for and against the motion, as well as any written orders by the trial court.
Bottom line: Spector’s filing of his opening brief on appeal + any motion for release from custody pending appeal is on hold until the request for extension (and probably the motion to augment the record as well) is decided.
Stay tuned here for the latest development in the Phillip Spector appeal.
September 9, 2009
Los Angeles, California
Phillip Spector’s lawyer on appeal, the venerable Dennis P. Riordan of San Francisco, has just filed with the California Court of Appeal for the Second Appellate District a request that the court extend the music producer’s time to file his opening brief on appeal “30 days from the ruling on appellant’s motion to augment the record on appeal.”
We previously posted that on August 8, 2009, Riordan filed a motion to “augment” (supplement) the record on appeal previously transmitted by the Los Angeles Superior Court to the court of appeal July 7, 2009. The “motion to augment,” which is an entirely routine house keeping measure to insure that all parts of the trial court record that Spector’s counsel needs to refer to in the all important factual record provided to the court of appeal, is still pending and awaiting decision.
Such motions, while routine, are nevertheless important, because a criminal appeal in California is not an opportunity to retry the case; the court of appeal may not reweigh the evidence or the credibility of the trial witnesses.
In addition, the factual contentions made by the parties to an appeal must be set forth in the record on appeal (consisting of the transcript of oral proceedings at trial (the so called “reporter’s transcript”) and the written pleadings filed by the attorneys for both sides in the trial court + any relevant orders issued by the trial court (the so called “clerk’s transcript”).
As an appellate attorney might say, “If it is not in the trial court record, it does not exist”.
Indeed, whenever the party to an appeal sets forth a fact in his or her brief, it must be supported by a page citation to the official record on appeal or at best the factual assertion will be disregarded or in egregious cases the court might strike the entire brief.
In addition, any claims of error by the trial court in respect to the ruling on motions to limit or exclude evidence (or other motions made during or after trial-such as a request for post conviction bail) must be supported by producing the transcript of the hearing on the motion, all of the papers filled for and against the motion, as well as any written orders by the trial court.
Bottom line: Spector’s filing of his opening brief on appeal + any motion for release from custody pending appeal is on hold until the request for extension (and probably the motion to augment the record as well) is decided.
Stay tuned here for the latest development in the Phillip Spector appeal.
No comments:
Post a Comment