A divided state Supreme Court has ruled that a judge overseeing a nonjury homicide by vehicle case had the discretion to call for additional evidence about the vehicle’s “events data recorder”—akin to an airplane’s “black box”—even though closing arguments had already taken place and neither party initially sought to introduce the additional evidence.
In a 3-2 ruling in Commonwealth v. Safka, the majority said the grant of broad discretion given trial judges presiding over nonjury trials means they may ask for additional evidence. The ruling affirmed a decision by the state Superior Court.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
