verdict meets standard in Rhode Island

2018If the verdict meets this standard, then a new trial may be granted.' " Id. (quoting State v. Guerra , 12 A.3d 759 , 765-66 (R.I. 2011) ).

2017If the verdict meets this standard, then a new trial may be granted.” State v. Guerra, 12 A.3d 759, 765-66 (R.I. 2011) (quoting State v. Rivera, 839 A.2d 497, 503 (R.I. 2003)).

2017If the verdict meets this standard, then a new trial may be granted.” State v. Guerra, 12 A.3d 759, 765-66 (R.I. 2011) (quoting State v. Rivera, 839 A.2d 497, 503 (R.I. 2003)).

2017If the verdict meets this standard, then a new trial may be granted.” State v. Guerra, 12 A.3d 759, 765-66 (R.I. 2011) (quoting State v. Rivera, 839 A.2d 497, 503 (R.I. 2003)).

2019"If the verdict meets this standard, then a new trial may be granted." Id. (quoting Staffier , 21 A.3d at 291 ).

2019"If the verdict meets this standard, then a new trial may be granted." Id. (quoting Staffier , 21 A.3d at 291 ).

2016If the trial justice concludes that “the verdict meets this standard, then a new trial may be granted.” State v. Rosario, 35 A.3d 938, 947 (R.I.2012) (internal quotation marks omitted).

2013“On appeal, this Court accords ‘great weight to a trial justice’s ruling on a motion for a new trial if he or she has articulated sufficient reasoning in support of the ruling.’ ” State v. Rosario, 35 A.3d 938, 947 (R.I.2012) (quoting State v. Texieira, 944 A.2d 132, 140-41 (R.I.2008)).

2013If the verdict meets this standard, then a new trial may be granted.” Id. at 290-91 (quoting State v. Guerra, 12 A.3d 759, 765-66 (R.I.2011)).

2012If the verdict meets this standard, then a new trial may be granted.” Id. at 290-91 (quoting State v. Guerra, 12 A.3d 759, 765-66 (R.I.2011)). 2 Discussion On appeal, Ricci presses the arguments he advanced below in support of his motion for a new trial: that the verdict was “contrary to the weight of the evidence” and that the “evidence adduced at trial was insufficient for the jury, as fact finder, to conclude that [Ricci was] guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.” He maintains that he was “substantially prejudiced and deprived of a fair trial because the jury, as fact finder, misconstrued the e

2013“On appeal, this Court accords ‘great weight to a trial justice’s ruling on a motion for a new trial if he or she has articulated sufficient reasoning in support of the ruling.’ ” State v. Rosario, 35 A.3d 938, 947 (R.I.2012) (quoting State v. Texieira, 944 A.2d 132, 140-41 (R.I.2008)).

2012On appeal, this Court accords “great weight to a trial justice’s ruling on a motion for a new trial if he or she has articulated sufficient reasoning in support of the ruling.” Texieira, 944 A.2d at 140-41 ; see also Morales, 895 A.2d at 119, 122 .

2012If the verdict meets this standard, then a new trial may be granted.” Guerra, 12 A.3d at 765-66 (internal quotation marks omitted); see also State v. Staffier, 21 A.3d 287, 290-91 (R.I.2011); DiCarlo, 987 A.2d at 870 ; Rivera, 839 A.2d at 503 .

2011If the verdict meets this standard, then a new trial may be granted.” Rivera, 839 A.2d at 503 ; see also DiCarlo, 987 A.2d at 870 .

2011With respect to the sufficiency of the record that will be reviewed by this Court, we have indicated that the record should “reflect a few sentences of the justice’s reasoning on each point.” State v. Banach, 648 A.2d 1363, 1367 (R.I.1994).

2010However, the motion will be denied if the trial justice determines that the evidence and the reasonable inferences drawn therefrom are so nearly balanced that reasonable individuals could differ.” Id. 5 In addition, we have indicated that the “record should reflect a few sentences of the justice’s reasoning on each point. * * * In providing a rationale for a decision, however, the trial justice need not refer to all the evidence supporting the decision but need only cite evidence sufficient to allow this [C]ourt to discern whether the justice has applied the appropriate standards.” Banach, 648

2017“When reviewing a trial justice’s decision on a motion for a new trial, ‘[w]e accord great deference * * * because a trial justice, being present during all phases of the trial, is in an especially good position to evaluate the facts and to judge the credibility of the witnesses.’ ” Grantley, 149 A.3d at 131 (quoting State v. Florez, 138 A.3d 789, 794-95 (R.I. 2016)).

2016This Court has indicated that, with respect to a trial justice’s ruling on a motion for new trial, the “record should reflect a few sentences of the [trial] justice’s reasoning on each point.” Hie, 93 A.3d at 975 (internal 'quotation marks omitted); see State v, Garrett, 91 A.3d 793, 800 (R.I.2014); Robot, 49 A.3d at 71.

2016This Court has indicated that, with respect to a trial justice’s ruling on a motion for new trial, the “record should reflect a few sentences of the [trial] justice’s reasoning on each point.” Hie, 93 A.3d at 975 (internal 'quotation marks omitted); see State v, Garrett, 91 A.3d 793, 800 (R.I.2014); Robot, 49 A.3d at 71.

2010However, the motion will be denied if the trial justice determines that the evidence and the reasonable inferences drawn therefrom are so nearly balanced that reasonable individuals could differ.” Id. 5 In addition, we have indicated that the “record should reflect a few sentences of the justice’s reasoning on each point. * * * In providing a rationale for a decision, however, the trial justice need not refer to all the evidence supporting the decision but need only cite evidence sufficient to allow this [C]ourt to discern whether the justice has applied the appropriate standards.” Banach, 648

2010However, the motion will be denied if the trial justice determines that the evidence and the reasonable inferences drawn therefrom are so nearly balanced that reasonable individuals could differ.” Id. 5 In addition, we have indicated that the “record should reflect a few sentences of the justice’s reasoning on each point. * * * In providing a rationale for a decision, however, the trial justice need not refer to all the evidence supporting the decision but need only cite evidence sufficient to allow this [C]ourt to discern whether the justice has applied the appropriate standards.” Banach, 648

2010However, the motion will be denied if the trial justice determines that the evidence and the reasonable inferences drawn therefrom are so nearly balanced that reasonable individuals could differ.” Id. 5 In addition, we have indicated that the “record should reflect a few sentences of the justice’s reasoning on each point. * * * In providing a rationale for a decision, however, the trial justice need not refer to all the evidence supporting the decision but need only cite evidence sufficient to allow this [C]ourt to discern whether the justice has applied the appropriate standards.” Banach, 648