In the Defendant’s appeal, the issue was whether the trial judge’s questioning of witnesses, including defendant and his expert, denied defendant a fair trial. In addition, the Court considers whether the judge improperly denied the jury’s request for written instructions.
The Court’s Holding: Defendant was entitled to face a single adversary, the State. He should not have had to bear the consequences of a judge who appeared to disbelieve him and his expert witness, revealed that disbelief to the jury, and supported a witness adverse to him. Because that conduct was clearly capable of producing an unjust result, a new trial is in order. However, the trial judge’s refusal to provide the jury with written instructions did not constitute plain error and therefore does not warrant reversal.
No related posts.
