In re Anonymous No. 16 D.B. 81

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• discussing the requirement that a defendant must have exercised due diligence for “newly discovered evidence” to result in a new trial
• moving to vacate a judgment before the court has entered judgment and sentence, is premature and cannot proceed
• evidence not newly discovered unless \it could not have been discovered and produced at trial through reasonable diligence\
• “Nor could [defendant] have proceeded under Rule 24.2 because a judgment of conviction and sentence had not yet been entered.”
• “[U]nder Rule 32.1(e), a defendant must establish that the evidence . . . could not have been discovered and produced at trial through reasonable diligence . . . .”
• “Nor could [defendant] have proceeded under Rule 24.2 because a judgment of conviction and sentence had not yet been entered. Like the petition for post-conviction relief, a motion to vacate the judgment would also have been premature.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).