In any criminal proceeding, the attorney general shall have the right to object to
any finding, ruling, decision, order, or judgment of the superior court or family
court, and the attorney general may appeal the findings, rulings, decisions, orders,
or judgments to the supreme court at any time before the defendant has been placed
in jeopardy; the defendant in any criminal proceeding may also appeal any findings,
rulings, decision, order, or judgment of the superior or family court; and the attorney
general may appeal thereafter, if, after trial, the defendant appeals. If the attorney
general appeals the findings, rulings, decisions, orders, or judgments of the superior
or family court before the defendant is placed in jeopardy and the defendant prevails
in the supreme court, the attorney for the defendant shall be entitled to a reasonable
attorney’s fee and costs, payable by the state, to be set by the supreme court, incurred
in representing the defendant in the prosecution of the attorney general’s appeal
before the supreme court.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
64
cases, 1969–2020 · leading case:
Tempest v. State, 141 A.3d 677 (R.I. 2016).
Tempest v. State, 141 A.3d 677 (R.I. 2016).
· cites it 3× “See G.L.1956 § 9-24-32 (“In any criminal proceeding, the attorney general shall have the right to object to any finding, ruling, decision, order, or judgment of the [Sjuperior [Cjourt or [Fjamily [Cjourt, and the attorney general may appeal the findings, rulings, decisions,…”
State v. Michael Patino, 93 A.3d 40 (R.I. 2014).
· cites it 3× “The attorney general, pursuant to G.L. 1956 § 9-24-32, 2 appealed from the Supe *43 rior Court order, arguing that: (1) defendant lacks standing to contest the lawfulness of the search of Trisha Oliver’s cell phone; (2) defendant does not have an objectively reasonable…”
State v. Gautier, 871 A.2d 347 (R.I. 2005).
· cites it 2× “In Beaulieu , the only issue before this Court was whether the state could seek appellate review of a non-violation determination by filing a bill of exceptions under G.L. 1956 § 9-24-32. Answering that inquiry in the negative, we held that the language of the statute, which…”
State v. Steven B. Morris, 92 A.3d 920 (R.I. 2014).
· cites it 3× “5 The state timely filed a notice to appeal the hearing justice’s granting of defendant’s various motions to suppress evidence, pursuant to G.L.1956 § 9-24-32. 6 A final order memorializing the hearing justice’s decisions on defendant’s motions to dismiss was entered on May 14,…”
State v. Campbell, 691 A.2d 564 (R.I. 1997).
· cites it 2× “The trial justice instructed the jury only on the crime of first-degree murder, and on March 22, 1995, the jury returned a guilty verdict.”
State v. Forbes, 900 A.2d 1114 (R.I. 2006).
· cites it 4× “” The state pursued this interlocutory appeal of the motion justice’s ruling pursuant to G.L.1956 § 9-24-32. II Analysis The state’s only contention on appeal is that the motion justice committed reversible error in granting defendants’ motions to suppress their custodial,…”
State v. Morel, 676 A.2d 1347 (R.I. 1996).
· cites it 2× “Following his sentencing on June 23, 1993, defendant filed this appeal pursuant to G.L.1956 § 9-24-32. Admission of DNA Evidence Background Information Human genetic information is encoded primarily in deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) molecules that are present in the chromosomes of…”
State v. Byrne, 972 A.2d 633 (R.I. 2009).
· cites it 3× “The state timely appealed pursuant to G.L. 1956 § 9-24-32. 7 II The Validity of the Warrant to Search Byrne’s Home A Standard of Review We begin by noting that, in the case before us, a search warrant was issued based on a sworn affidavit by a police officer that was submitted…”
State v. Young, 941 A.2d 124 (R.I. 2008).
· cites it 3× “3 The state, under G.L.1956 § 9-24-32, 4 filed an appeal and argues to this Court that the trial justice erred when he failed to follow the procedural rules governing criminal matters in the Family Court.”
State v. Banach, 648 A.2d 1363 (R.I. 1994).
“The trial justice denied the motion and sentenced defendant to life imprisonment for the murder and to a five-year concurrent sentence on the weapons conviction.”
State v. King, 693 A.2d 658 (R.I. 1997).
· cites it 2× “Following sentencing, defendant filed this appeal, pursuant to G.L.1956 § 9-24-32. Motion to Suppress The first question before us is whether the trial justice erred in finding that there was probable cause for the issuance of the search warrant.”
State v. Benoit, 650 A.2d 1230 (R.I. 1994).
· cites it 2× “1956 (1985 Reenactment) § 9-24-32. The sole issue now before us is whether §§ 31-27-2.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.