State ex rel. L.E.W.

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that unless the record shows otherwise, we will presume that the trial judge properly exercised his discretion as the thirteenth juror
• discussing that the trial judge will be presumed to have properly exercised his discretion as the thirteenth juror unless otherwise demonstrated by the record
• explaining that unless the record shows otherwise, we will presume that the trial judge properly exercised his discretion as the thirteenth juror
• rejecting appellant’s claim that trial court erred by failing to consider his motion for new trial on the “general grounds” because nothing in trial court’s order summarily denying defendant’s motion for new trial suggested it did not properly exercise its discretion
• rejecting defendant’s claim of error that the trial court’s order failed to reflect that the trial court evaluated the credibility of the witnesses and weighed the evidence in deciding whether to exercise its discretion to grant a new trial in its role as the “thirteenth juror”
• “Without having made such an evidentiary showing at the hearing, Appellant cannot demonstrate prejudice on his claim that counsel was ineffective. (Citations omitted.)”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).