Appellant Name: Hope Kant
Appellant Attorney(s): Hope Kant
Appellant Attorney(s): Hope Kant
Trial Docket Number: #23-CM-0102
Presiding Trial Judge: Colt Daniels
Notice of Appeal Filed: viewtopic.php?p=740642#p740642
Presiding Trial Judge: Colt Daniels
Notice of Appeal Filed: viewtopic.php?p=740642#p740642
- [X] Before Verdict
[ ] After Verdict
Reason for Notice of Appeal:
- [X] Motion to be overturned
[ ] Errors in the trials procedure
[ ] Errors in the judge's interpretation of the law
[ ] New evidence proving appellants innocence
- 1. The regulations cited by the Judge have no true legal baring. Timelines are put on discovery to ensure that evidence has enough time to be reviewed prior to trial. There is no actual legal reason to deny evidence outside the discovery window unless it conflicts with the above sentence, and even then it would be grounds for an appeal on the side of the defense. I assume the regulation was put in place when there was more of a backlog and time spent waiting for evidence on cases.
2. The regulations cited by the Judge allow for evidence to be presented after the discovery period due to exigent circumstances. I will expound on this more during the actual appeal narrative.
3. The Prosecution, Defense and courts have given the Judges more than enough time to respond to verdicts. Waiting months at times to hear from a Judge about a motion or verdict. The Prosecution is requesting the same consideration that we've given to Judges, especially considering for a while we had less Prosecutors than Judges.