People v. Mahar

How courts have described this case

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

• finding the brief ruling ambiguous on whether the correct standard was applied and remanding for application of the weight-of-the-evidence standard
• remanding case for application of the weight-of-the-evidence standard because the district court 19 did not articulate what standard it applied and the record was ambiguous as to the standard applied
• remanding for application of weight-of-the-evidence standard when judge found verdict supported by “competent” evidence
• noting appellate courts “have repeatedly remanded to make certain the proper standard was applied”
• finding defendant waived issues because of failure to follow the rules of appellate procedure
• “Root appeals and asserts the district court applied the wrong standard in ruling on his motion for a new trial.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).