Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 21 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from State v. Lee, Unpublished Decision (12-1-2005).
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | State v. Lee, Unpublished Decision (12-1-2005) Anchor | green | “clear and convincing proof that the defendant was 'unavoidably prevented' from filing 'requires more than a mere allegation that a defendant has been unavoidably prevented from discovering the evidence he seeks to introduce as support for a new trial.” | 9 |
| 2 | State v. Waddy | green | “because appellant's motion was filed well outside the 120-day period, he was required to obtain leave of court to file his motion for new trial.” | 4 |
| 3 | State v. Berry, 06ap-803 (5-10-2007) | green | “had no knowledge of the evidence supporting the motion for new trial and could not have learned of the existence of the evidence within the time prescribed for filing such a motion through the exercise of reasonable diligence.” | 3 |
| 4 | State v. Lee, Unpublished Decision (12-1-2005) | green | “requires more than a mere allegation that a defendant has been unavoidably prevented from discovering the evidence he seeks to introduce as support for a new trial.” | 3 |
| 5 | State v. Berry, 06ap-803 (5-10-2007) | green | “a defendant demonstrates he was unavoidably prevented from discovering the new evidence within the 120-day time period for filing a motion for new trial when the defendant 'had no knowledge of the evidence supporting the motion for new trial and could not have learned of the exi…” | 2 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.