When a court receives a request for a retrial, it can decide on the above in two ways. First, the court will reject the request for a retrial if: 1. the request was filed by an unauthorized person; 2. the Applicant failed to comply with the rules; 3. the applicant has waived the claim; 4. there is no legal reason to repeat the procedure; 5. the facts or evidence on which the request is based have already been presented in an earlier request for retrial which was legally rejected; 6. the facts or the evidence are clearly not appropriate to allow the retrial of the criminal proceedings. Passi & Patel Criminal Law Firm Mississauga will redirect on you this matter.
The law, in this part, does not prescribe the possibility of declaring a remedy to decisions of a panel on a request for a retrial, but the practice, in this case, created a well-founded path and held that the parties, in these cases, must also be entitled to a decision. Therefore, the decision is allowed to appeal to the higher court, within 3 days, from the day of receipt of the decision.
In practice, the most common case for resolving pleadings is the dismissal of the request on the ground that the stated facts or evidence are clearly not appropriate to allow the retrial. In one case, the convicted person filed a motion for reopening of the criminal proceedings stating that the verdict by which he was finally sentenced was based on the false testimony of a witness, against whom he had filed a criminal complaint with the competent prosecution and that pre-trial proceedings were pending. Defendant’s counsel stated, in the supplement to the request, that the defendant was in the correctional facility at the time of the commission of the criminal offense for which he was convicted. Given that the criminal proceedings have not yet been instituted, let alone concluded, in which case, the convicted person would have to prove such facts by a final judgment finding that person guilty, this was rejected by the panel. The Panel also rejects the request of the convicted defense counsel, finding that the defense counsel, in support of his allegations that the defendant was in the correctional facility at the time of the commission of the crime, did not provide any evidence, that fact was not eligible to allow a retrial.
In the second case, let’s say that the convicted person filed a motion for reopening of criminal proceedings, finding him guilty of committing two criminal offenses of robbery in an attempt under and two criminal offenses of robbery. CC, and was sentenced to five years in prison. In his request, he stated that after the verdict became final, new facts and new evidence appeared, that he had not committed the crimes for which he was convicted, that he had obtained that information while serving a prison sentence, and that he descriptively cited witnesses who could testify that he is not guilty of committing the offenses charged against him.