Hypos Stewart Assume the Supreme Court in Stewart reversed the judgment of conviction and entered a judgment of acquittal on the grounds that the evidence was legally insufficient for any reasonable jury to find the defendant guilty of arson. [Recall that what the Court actually did was reverse and order a new trial on the grounds that the jury verdict was against the weight of the evidence.] 1. A week later a Connecticut court hears case in which the defendant (Abe) is charged with arson for burning down a barn belonging to Victor that was 18 rods away from Victors dwelling house and separated from it by a highway. If Abe files a motion for judgment of acquittal, how should the court decide? Why? 2. A week after the Stewart decision a Connecticut court hears case in which the defendant (Bob) is charged with arson for burning down a tool shed belonging to Victor that was 8 rods away from Victors dwelling house and separated from it by a dirt road. If Bob files a motion for judgment of acquittal, how should the court decide? Why? 3. A week after the Stewart decision a Connecticut court hears case in which the defendant (Cathy) is charged with arson for burning down a detached garage belonging to Victor that was directly behind and 2 rods from Victors dwelling house. If Cathy files a motion for judgment of acquittal, how should court the decide? Why? What is the process the court would use to decide the later cases? What is the holding of the Stewart case and how do we decide that? Another hypo: If State v. Stewart was the only authority available to the Supreme Court of Connecticut at the time it was presented with the McGowan case, how do you think the Court would have decided McGowan?
Some other questions for class on Weds 8/20 (but not all): McGowan: > What ruling of the trial court does the defendant challenge on appeal? What error did the trial court commit according to the Supreme Court? > What are the elements of the crime of arson and which is in issue in McGowan? > Articulate the holding of McGowan. What is the pertinent point or aspect of law & the material facts? > Can we say that it is clear from McGowan and Stewart that the burning of a building which is not occupied at the time of the burning and is separated from an occupied dwelling cannot be arson? Toole: > Do you understand the fact situation? > What arguments does the defendant make in the trial court and in the appeal court in support of the motion for new trial? > Does the appeal court accept these arguments? Why not? > Can we synthesize the decisions in Stewart, McGowan, and Toole and articulate rules that these cases stand for as a group?