A verdict is a ruling issued by a jury or judge in a legal case, determining the guilt or innocence of a defendant in a criminal case or the liability or non-liability of a party in a civil case. Various types of verdicts exist, including guilty verdicts, directed verdicts, and special verdicts. However, a repugnant verdict, which contradicts itself by simultaneously convicting and acquitting an individual of the same offence, is prohibited and may lead to a retrial.
A repugnant verdict is a verdict that contradicts itself, occurring when a defendant is convicted and acquitted of different crimes that share identical elements. For instance, if a defendant is found guilty of both murder and manslaughter, which have the same elements, it would constitute a repugnant verdict. This type of verdict is illegal and inadmissible in court, also referred to as a contradictory verdict. For example, if a defendant is charged with both assault and battery, and the jury finds them guilty of assault but not guilty of battery, it would be considered a repugnant verdict. This is due to the fact that assault and battery share the same elements, thus rendering the verdict contradictory.
A repugnant verdict is a verdict that is inconsistent with the evidence presented at trial or with the law.
Yes, a repugnant verdict can be appealed to a higher court.
Grounds for appealing a repugnant verdict may include errors in the jury instructions, misconduct by the jury, or new evidence that was not considered at trial.
The time limit for appealing a repugnant verdict varies by jurisdiction, but it is typically within a few weeks or months after the verdict is rendered.
If a repugnant verdict is overturned on appeal, the case may be sent back for a new trial or the charges against the defendant may be dismissed.
In some cases, a repugnant verdict may be corrected by the trial judge through a process called a judgment notwithstanding the verdict.
A repugnant verdict is one that is inconsistent with the evidence or the law, while a wrongful verdict is one that is based on errors or misconduct during the trial.
In some cases, a repugnant verdict may be challenged through post-conviction relief or habeas corpus petitions.
If you believe the jury reached a repugnant verdict, you should consult with a qualified attorney to discuss your options for appealing the verdict.
To prevent a repugnant verdict, it is important to present a strong case with compelling evidence and to ensure that the jury is properly instructed on the law.
This site contains general legal information but does not constitute professional legal advice for your particular situation. Persuing this glossary does not create an attorney-client or legal adviser relationship. If you have specific questions, please consult a qualified attorney licensed in your jurisdiction.
This glossary post was last updated: 17th April 2024.
To help you cite our definitions in your bibliography, here is the proper citation layout for the three major formatting styles, with all of the relevant information filled in.
- Page URL:https://dlssolicitors.com/define/repugnant-verdict/
- Modern Language Association (MLA):Repugnant Verdict. dlssolicitors.com. DLS Solicitors. May 09 2024 https://dlssolicitors.com/define/repugnant-verdict/.
- Chicago Manual of Style (CMS):Repugnant Verdict. dlssolicitors.com. DLS Solicitors. https://dlssolicitors.com/define/repugnant-verdict/ (accessed: May 09 2024).
- American Psychological Association (APA):Repugnant Verdict. dlssolicitors.com. Retrieved May 09 2024, from dlssolicitors.com website: https://dlssolicitors.com/define/repugnant-verdict/
Our team of professionals are based in Alderley Edge, Cheshire. We offer clear, specialist legal advice in all matters relating to Family Law, Wills, Trusts, Probate, Lasting Power of Attorney and Court of Protection.
All author posts