If jurors were challenged for cause simply because they needed more than one witness to convict, then they were invalidly challenged for cause. If they were challenged for cause because they could not convict based upon one witness whom they believed beyond a reasonable doubt, and whose testimony proved every element of the indictment beyond a reasonable doubt, then they were validly challenged for cause.
June 12, 2006 at 12:00 AM
1 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.Com
Presented by BigVoodoo
Join the industry's top owners, investors, developers, brokers & financiers at THE MULTIFAMILY EVENT OF THE YEAR!
Where the region's top lawyers, law firms and in-house teams will gather to celebrate their most stellar achievements of the year.
This conference brings together the industry's most influential & knowledgeable real estate executives from the net lease sector.
Looking for an Associate Attorney with 2 to 5 years experience to handle Labor and Employment Law, Pension Appeals and Workers Compensation....
Health Law Associate CT Shipman is seeking an associate to join our national longstanding health law practice. Candidates must have t...
Regional mid-sized firm with diverse civil litigation practice seeking hardworking and dedicated attorneys with 1-5 years experience for it...
Lawyers of Distinction would like to announce...
Snyder Sarno D'Aniello Maceri & daCosta would like to announce that...
COLE SCHOTZ P.C. WELCOME HONORABLE GARRY S. ROTHSTADT, J.A.D. (RET.)
