Why is it that a judge can over ride a jury's decision?
438182
A jury is used as a guideline for the judge. Many judges are pursuaded by the jury and follow what a jury says. But jury selection is key, if you get a liberal jury who finds a without a doubt criminal innocent, the judge will overrule this decision. Judges without juries are much more strict and follow thier own guidelines. Juries help the judge see the publics view about this persons alleged crime. This is why a criminal demand a trial by jury of 12, it is to help soften the sentence.
742495
The outcome of what was being decided in court is being withheld.  Could be a closed file (closed to the public for whatever reason) or because the judge wants more time to render a decision.
771752
Sure,happens all the time. Thats why good defense attorneys make the big bucks, he knows how to manipulate the system to circumvent any guilt and cause doubt in the jurys minds. Look at OJ Simpson and others. Basically it comes down to the more money you have the less guilty you are. Client-attorney privledge prevents any true fact between them from being known to anyone else. Another one of the fine perks of our legal system.
251398
a default judgment is entered.  if you are not there to contest it, and the ruling is against you, you waive all rights to future contesting it and are absolutely stuck with the ruling...a bad idea unless you are guilty as sin and are prepared for the consequences.
927259
It basically means that a majority of the Grand Jurors believed that the Prosecutor showed, by a preponderance of the evidence,  that a crime was committed and a certain individual, and/or individuals, committed it.  That's it.  It's then up to the trial judge or jury to determine, beyond a reasonable doubt, that a particular person or persons committed the aforesaid crime.\nThe Prosecutor doesn't hold the case over - the Grand Jury does.  The Prosecutor simply presents it and the jurors make the decision.
389415
depends on the injury, your attorney, and the jury--they will decide the amount.  If it is too outrageous, the judge can decrease it.
235565
"Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."\n\nBasically, what this means is that judges can't impose ridiculous amounts of bail for a relatively minor crime, and that punishment be humane. Of course, "humane" is a very subjective word, and there's still debate going on about the cruelty of certain punishments (death penalty, or mandated abstinence, for example). Also, the Supreme Court ruled that torture, taking away citizenship, and (!) disembowelment are all unconstitutional b/c of this amendment.
926531
It is if the presiding Judge allows it
1173700
It is up to the court to decide, but it is wise to get a lawyer in the state the DUI happend in becuase they know the judges and the loop holes so they can get you farther than an out of state lawyer can.
830200
Maybe the judge wanted to go on vacation?
280232
Yes, but it doesn't happen terribly often.  \n\nStil, there are examples.  Gideon v. Wainwright, for instance, overturned Betts v. Brady in ruling that persons accused of felonies were entitled to the assistance of counsel in state courts.  That led directly to a whole line of cases characterized by Miranda v. Arizona about the rights of criminal defendants.\n\nBut the Supreme Court overturning itself is still by far the exception, rather than the rule.  It usually takes a significant change in the nature of the issue and facts presented, or a significant change in the court, or even the nation, before it happens.
144645
No one can - that is why a jury has so many members.
901203
Because its the law as we want to see it, dramatic.  When the law is often a lengthy, boring process that is often dull, broken by intermittent spouts of hate fill vitriolic speech.  Then, back to boring until something else interesting happens, if it does.  Usually, most court cases are settled amicable with little or no stress, so this is not interesting since there is not dramatic effect to hang onto.  Also, on television, often the District Attorney or the Defendants Attorney will hang their case on a last minute "hook" that may or may not work.  Will the last witness show up?  Will the attorney be able to make an impact on the jury they hope, or will the other attorney be able to deflect their words?  This is what keeps it interesting.  The world rarely works this way.  \n\nI know I wouldn't want my attorney betting it all on a last minute hope, would you?
907791
The date for such trials is set months ago.\nThe judges have to give appropriate time to both teams of lawers.\nThe judges have to consider holidays etc.\nthe judges have to account for the time they will need to write the verdict.\nHence it is possible that government can run the trial in such a way and in such a timely manner that the verdict concides with a particular event.
3728
No one but a juror may be in the jury deliberation room. This is why it is so important that the judge determine what evidence is admissible before the trial begins. If a juror believes other jurors are considering irrelevant evidence, the juror should inform the judge, who would instruct them of their consitutional responsibility and so forth. If a judge believes a jury did not consider the evidence properly, he/she can vacate the verdict, which is very rarely done, for obvious reasons.
767942
The idea of an independent judiciary is that when somebody has the power over somebodies liberty, you can't have them swayed by political, or indeed public feelings. judges are employed to dispense justice, not the poiliticians, or indeed tabloid newpapers.\n\nIf there is disqueit about the leniency, or harshness of a sentence it can be handed down to a court of appeal to apply and ajustment to the sentence, or indeed quash a conviction and order a retrial.\n\nThis is a safegauard against bigotry and ill informed public prejudice,
436129
Basically the Orthodox rule is the Judge saying "rather than me deciding whether the evidence is admissible or not, we'll let it be admitted into evidence and the jury can decide what weight and value to assign to it."