Supreme Court of the United States
United States v. Johnson
February 4, 1946327 U.S. 106
Summary
The Court held that an appellate court may not review a trial court's factual findings underlying a ruling on a motion for a new trial based on newly discovered evidence when those findings are supported by evidence. Because the trial judge carefully evaluated the affidavits and found no proof that the government's witness committed perjury, the court of appeals erred by reweighing the evidence and ordering a new trial. The judgment was reversed and the case remanded for enforcement of the convictions and sentences.
Holding
- Appellate review of factual findings underlying denial of a new-trial motion based on newly discovered evidence. An appellate court may not review or reweigh the trial court's factual findings on such a motion when the findings are supported by evidence. Appellate intervention is permissible only when it clearly appears that the findings are wholly unsupported by any evidence; because the district court's findings were supported, the court of appeals should have dismissed the appeal.
Docket Nos. 115, 116
Cited authorities
- Rule 2
Cited by
- Willie Strickland, Jr., Appellant v. United States, Appellee
- Groendyke Transport, Inc. v. Elmer Davis, Regional Director, 16th Region, National Labor Relations Board, And…
- State of Minnesota, Respondent v. Roger Sipe Caldwell, Appellant; and Roger Sipe Caldwell, Petitioner, Appellant…
- State of Minnesota, Respondent v. Roger Sipe Caldwell, Appellant; and Roger Sipe Caldwell, Petitioner, Appellant…
- John T. Dirring, Defendant, Appellant v. United States of America, Appellee
- Arturo Coll Carpintero, Defendant, Appellant v. United States of America, Appellee
- United States of America, Appellee v. Lester Irving Crandall, Defendant, Appellant
- United States v. Lewis M. Strauss, United States of America v. Ilario Zannino, United States of America v. Joseph P…