State v. Joel Najera

Citations

• 211 A.3d 938

Syllabus

The defendant, Joel Najera, appealed from a judgment of conviction in the Superior Court after a jury found him guilty of one count of assault with a dangerous weapon, to wit, a machete, in violation of G.L. 1956 § 11-5-2, and one count of malicious injury to property, to wit, a car window and basement window, in violation of G.L. 1956 § 11-44-1. On appeal, the defendant argued that the trial justice clearly erred when he denied the defendant's motion for a new trial because, according to the defendant, the verdict was against the weight of the evidence. The Supreme Court held that the trial justice independently assessed the credibility of each witness, weighed the evidence before him, assessed it in light of the jury charge, and determined that he would have reached the same conclusion as the jury. Specifically, the Court found that the trial justice noted the shortcomings and inconsistencies of certain witnesses, passed upon the credibility of the state's witnesses, and found those witnesses to be quite credible, and found defendant and his witnesses to be lacking in credibility. Accordingly, the Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of the Superior Court.