Skip to main content
Please enter a legal issue and/or a location
Begin typing to search, use arrow keys to navigate, use enter to select

Find a Lawyer

More Options

US v. Bell, No. 08-5506

By FindLaw Staff on October 21, 2009 11:33 AM

In the government's appeal from the district court's order granting a new trial in an attempted murder prosecution, the order is reversed where the district court erred in ordering a new trial because: 1) the district court's jury instructions on intentional conduct were legally correct and did not constitute plain error warranting a new trial; 2) the district court's use of a general verdict form was not plain error and thus not a basis for ordering a new trial; 3) the district court rested its decision to grant a new trial on clearly erroneous factual findings; and 4) the district court failed to evaluate the entire trial record in ruling on defendant's motion for a new trial.

Read US v. Bell, No. 08-5506

Appellate Information

Argued: October 7, 2009

Decided: October 20, 2009


Per Curiam


For Appellant:

Tracy Lee Dayton, Michael J. Gustafson, Nora R. Dannehy, William J. Nardini, Assistant United States Attorneys, Office of the United States Attorney for the District of Connecticut, Hartford, CT

For Appellee:

John R. Gulash, Gulash & Riccio, Bridgeport, CT, for Appellee.

You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help

Meeting with a lawyer can help you understand your options and how to best protect your rights. Visit our attorney directory to find a lawyer near you who can help.

Or contact an attorney near you:
Copied to clipboard