计划执行与检查节点
executing-plans
按既定实施计划完成工作,保持过程检查和反馈。
motion-new-trial【效率与协作】Drafts a post-verdict Motion for New Trial in criminal defense cases. Structures arguments around recognized grounds (weight-of-evidence, newly discovered evidence, prosecutorial misconduct, juror misconduct, IAC, judicial error) with record citations. Use when filing a motion for new trial, post-conviction motion, or requesting the court set aside a…
独立 GitHub 快照 · 自动分类 · 以原作者文档为准
name: motion-new-trial language: en description: Drafts a post-verdict Motion for New Trial in criminal defense cases. Structures arguments around recognized grounds (weight-of-evidence, newly discovered evidence, prosecutorial misconduct, juror misconduct, IAC, judicial error) with record citations. Use when filing a motion for new trial, post-conviction motion, or requesting the court set aside a criminal verdict. tags:
Drafts a motion asking the trial court to set aside a jury verdict and order a new trial, with ground-by-ground legal and factual support from the trial record.
Standard jurisdiction-format caption. Include court name, case number, defendant's full legal name. Title: "DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL."
| Element | Content |
|---|---|
| Procedural authority | Specific rule and statutory basis |
| Verdict date & charges | Conviction counts identified |
| Relief sought | New trial; evidentiary hearing if applicable |
| Thesis | One sentence on why the verdict should be set aside |
Draft each ground as a separate labeled section. Include only grounds supported by the record.
Per-ground structure:
Grounds checklist (assert only those supported):
| Ground | Key Elements | Standard |
|---|---|---|
| Weight of evidence | Miscarriage of justice despite jury deference | Unconscionable to let verdict stand |
| Newly discovered evidence | (1) Post-trial discovery, (2) due diligence, (3) material/not cumulative, (4) probably different result | All four prongs required |
| Prosecutorial misconduct | Specific acts depriving defendant of fair trial | Conduct undermined fundamental fairness |
| Juror misconduct | Extraneous info, improper communications, undisclosed bias | Reasonable possibility misconduct influenced verdict |
| IAC | (1) Below professional standards, (2) prejudice | Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) |
| Judicial/legal error | Erroneous rulings affecting substantial rights | Abuse of discretion; not harmless beyond reasonable doubt |
For each ground: legal standard → controlling authority → application to facts. Bluebook citation format. Distinguish unfavorable precedent explicitly.