We are independent & ad-supported. We may earn a commission for purchases made through our links.
WiseGeek

Advertiser Disclosure

Our website is an independent, advertising-supported platform. We provide our content free of charge to our readers, and to keep it that way, we rely on revenue generated through advertisements and affiliate partnerships. This means that when you click on certain links on our site and make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn more.

How We Make Money

We sustain our operations through affiliate commissions and advertising. If you click on an affiliate link and make a purchase, we may receive a commission from the merchant at no additional cost to you. We also display advertisements on our website, which help generate revenue to support our work and keep our content free for readers. Our editorial team operates independently from our advertising and affiliate partnerships to ensure that our content remains unbiased and focused on providing you with the best information and recommendations based on thorough research and honest evaluations. To remain transparent, we’ve provided a list of our current affiliate partners here.
Finance

What is a Motion for a New Trial?

Mary McMahon
By
Updated May 17, 2024
Our promise to you
WiseGeek is dedicated to creating trustworthy, high-quality content that always prioritizes transparency, integrity, and inclusivity above all else. Our ensure that our content creation and review process includes rigorous fact-checking, evidence-based, and continual updates to ensure accuracy and reliability.

Our Promise to you

Founded in 2002, our company has been a trusted resource for readers seeking informative and engaging content. Our dedication to quality remains unwavering—and will never change. We follow a strict editorial policy, ensuring that our content is authored by highly qualified professionals and edited by subject matter experts. This guarantees that everything we publish is objective, accurate, and trustworthy.

Over the years, we've refined our approach to cover a wide range of topics, providing readers with reliable and practical advice to enhance their knowledge and skills. That's why millions of readers turn to us each year. Join us in celebrating the joy of learning, guided by standards you can trust.

Editorial Standards

At WiseGeek, we are committed to creating content that you can trust. Our editorial process is designed to ensure that every piece of content we publish is accurate, reliable, and informative.

Our team of experienced writers and editors follows a strict set of guidelines to ensure the highest quality content. We conduct thorough research, fact-check all information, and rely on credible sources to back up our claims. Our content is reviewed by subject matter experts to ensure accuracy and clarity.

We believe in transparency and maintain editorial independence from our advertisers. Our team does not receive direct compensation from advertisers, allowing us to create unbiased content that prioritizes your interests.

A motion for a new trial is a formal legal request that asks a judge to set aside a decision in a case so that a new trial can be held. This type of legal motion is filed only in cases in which people feel that gross procedural or legal errors compromised the trial to the point that the outcome cannot be viewed as valid. It is unusual for a judge to grant this motion, and when a judge does so, it indicates that the original trial was so flawed that the outcome was unjust.

The rules about when people may file a motion for a new trial vary. As a general rule, the motion must be filed within seven to 30 days of the conclusion of a trial. This gives legal experts time to review a trial to determine whether or not it was conducted properly, but does not set up such an open-ended deadline that a motion can be filed months or years later. The general idea is that if people identify profound errors with a trial, they should be able to do so quickly.

When the motion is filed, an attorney usually goes before the judge who heard the case in the first place. The lawyer provides supporting evidence to show that there were problems with the trial that compromise the outcome. Known as key errors, such problems are significant in nature and had the effect of skewing the trial result. Some things which might lead a judge to grant a new trial include violations of the rules of evidence, jury tampering, and not following courtroom procedure.

While weighing the legal motion, a judge will consider the facts provided by the lawyer who made the motion to determine whether or not they are compelling enough. The judge may agree, for example, that errors were made, but believe that the errors did not functionally alter the outcome of the trial and that they were minor in nature. For instance, if someone failed to word a statement properly when introducing evidence, this is an error, but it might not be a key error.

If a motion for a new trial is denied, this is not the end of the road. The attorney can write an appeal and bring it to an appellate court. These higher courts have the ability to review lower court proceedings. The appellate court may agree that the trial was categorically flawed and order the lower court to retry the matter.

WiseGeek is dedicated to providing accurate and trustworthy information. We carefully select reputable sources and employ a rigorous fact-checking process to maintain the highest standards. To learn more about our commitment to accuracy, read our editorial process.
Mary McMahon
By Mary McMahon

Ever since she began contributing to the site several years ago, Mary has embraced the exciting challenge of being a WiseGeek researcher and writer. Mary has a liberal arts degree from Goddard College and spends her free time reading, cooking, and exploring the great outdoors.

See our Editorial Process Share Feedback

Related Articles

Discussion Comments

By JimmyT — On May 29, 2012

I am really wondering if someone could list some hypotheticals as to what could constitue a successful motion for a new trial and what is something that could be denied, yet seeming to be legitimate to begin with.

I really feel that hypotheticals would allow people who are not as knowledgeable about the law to have a chance to understand how strict the legal system is as far a mistakes go, as well as show exactly how the process for a new trial occurs.

I hear way too much speculation about what can and cannot constitute a successful motion for a new trial and this keeps people from attaining valuable information in the legal process.

Although without proper training one cannot be an expert, it does help to know the basics in such matters so one can understand how the system works and if they ever fall into such a situation that they will know what to do and what process to take in the matter.

By Izzy78 — On May 28, 2012

@Emilski - I think the reason why people believe that to be true is because the law is such a complicated thing and people not properly trained in the subject have very little idea and assume that there cannot be a single mistake in a trial.

Truth is mistakes happen all the time that do not result in motions for new trials and most of the time the motion is just a last ditch effort by the party to give them any hope to win the case.

I really feel like people need to leave the speculation of law to the experts and not just assume such matters. That is why the courts see people as being innocent until proven guilty and does not allow the court of public opinion to make the decision or have any bearing whatsoever on cases.

By Emilski — On May 27, 2012

@matthewc23 - That is true, but most people have a misconception about evidence and believe that if one thing is wrong with a trial a new one must begin. This however, cannot be any further from the truth.

It is too easy for something wrong to occur in a trial and that is why there is constantly evidence being thrown out or testimony disregarded that was deemed improper.

Even if after the trial something is found to be improper, it has to be proven that this could have led to a wrongful decision or hindered the court. If it is something say procedural, that had virtually no impact on the trial, then this will not warrant a new trial to be requested.

I really find this to be a major misconception and I am really wondering why this is always such the case?

By matthewc23 — On May 27, 2012

I do not know much about the law but one thing that I do know is that it is very easy to a mis- trial to occur, which would spawn a motion for a new trial.

I remember seeing a movie once, that although comedy based and not real accurate, the character refused to go along with the jury and render a guilty verdict, so he could stay sequestered in the hotel that was provided for the jurors.

Although this was done in a comedic tone, this is an example of something that could actually render a mis-trial, because the juror has an agenda to make the trial last longer.

That being said there are a lot of other things that can occur to render a mis-trial and render a motion for a new trial and these can come from the prosecution, defense, judge, jury, witnesses, and even the evidence itself if something is deemed to be improper.

Mary McMahon

Mary McMahon

Ever since she began contributing to the site several years ago, Mary has embraced the exciting challenge of being a...

Learn more
WiseGeek, in your inbox

Our latest articles, guides, and more, delivered daily.

WiseGeek, in your inbox

Our latest articles, guides, and more, delivered daily.