More Categories

Rule 4-331 – Motions for New Trial; Revisory Power

May 13, 2021 | Criminal Prodcedure, Maryland

(a) Within Ten Days of Verdict. On motion of the defendant filed within ten days after a verdict, the court, in the interest of justice, may order a new trial.

Cross reference: For the effect of a motion under this section on the time for appeal see Rules 7-104(b) and 8-202(b).

(b) Revisory Power.

(1)Generally. The court has revisory power and control over the judgment to set aside an unjust or improper verdict and grant a new trial:

(A) in the District Court, on motion filed within 90 days after its imposition of sentence if an appeal has not been perfected;
(B) in the circuit courts, on motion filed within 90 days after its imposition of sentence. Thereafter, the court has revisory power and control over the judgment in case of fraud, mistake, or irregularity.
(2)Act of Prostitution While Under Duress. On motion filed pursuant to Code, Criminal Procedure Article, § 8-302, the court has revisory power and control over a judgment of conviction of prostitution to vacate the judgment, modify the sentence, or grant a new trial.
(c) Newly Discovered Evidence. The court may grant a new trial or other appropriate relief on the ground of newly discovered evidence which could not have been discovered by due diligence in time to move for a new trial pursuant to section (a) of this Rule:

(1) on motion filed within one year after the later of (A) the date the court imposed sentence or (B) the date the court received a mandate issued by the final appellate court to consider a direct appeal from the judgment or a belated appeal permitted as post conviction relief; and
(2) on motion filed at any time if the motion is based on DNA identification testing not subject to the procedures of Code, Criminal Procedure Article, § 8-201 or other generally accepted scientific techniques the results of which, if proved, would show that the defendant is innocent of the crime of which the defendant was convicted.

Committee note: Newly discovered evidence of mitigating circumstances does not entitle a defendant to claim actual innocence. See Sawyer v. Whitley, 112 S.Ct. 2514 (1992).

(d) DNA Evidence. If the defendant seeks a new trial or other appropriate relief under Code, Criminal Procedure Article, § 8-201, the defendant shall proceed in accordance with Rules 4-701 through 4-711. On motion by the State, the court may suspend proceedings on a motion for new trial or other relief under this Rule until the defendant has exhausted the remedies provided by Rules 4-701 through 4-711.

Cross reference: For retroactive applicability of Code, Criminal Procedure Article, § 8-201, see Thompson v. State, 411 Md. 664 (2009).

(e) Form of Motion. A motion filed under this Rule shall (1) be in writing, (2) state in detail the grounds upon which it is based, (3) if filed under section (c) of this Rule, describe the newly discovered evidence, and (4) contain or be accompanied by a request for hearing if a hearing is sought.
(f) Disposition. The court may hold a hearing on any motion filed under this Rule. Subject to section (d) of this Rule, the court shall hold a hearing on a motion filed under section (c) if a hearing was requested and the court finds that:

(1) if the motion was filed pursuant to subsection (c)(1) of this Rule, it was timely filed,
(2) the motion satisfies the requirements of section (e) of this Rule, and
(3) the movant has established a prima facie basis for granting a new trial. The court may revise a judgment or set aside a verdict prior to entry of a judgment only on the record in open court. The court shall state its reasons for setting aside a judgment or verdict and granting a new trial.

Md. Crim. Causes. 4-331

This Rule is derived in part from former Rule 770 and M.D.R. 770 and is in part new.

Adopted April 6, 1984, eff. July 1, 1984. Amended June 3, 1988, eff. July 1, 1988; Dec. 10, 1996, eff. July 1, 1997; April 8, 1997, eff. July 1, 1997; Oct. 5, 1999; Nov. 1, 2001, eff. Jan. 1, 2002; Jan. 8, 2002, eff. Feb. 1, 2002; Sept. 10, 2009, eff. Oct. 1, 2009; March 9, 2010, eff. July 1, 2010; Oct. 4, 2012, eff. Jan. 1, 2013; Dec. 7, 2015, eff. Jan. 1, 2016.

HISTORICAL NOTES

1999 Orders

The October 5, 1999, order amended the cross reference following section (e).

2001 Orders

The November 1, 2001, order made changes to allow motions for new trials on the ground of newly discovered evidence based on DNA identification testing or other accepted scientific techniques.

2002 Orders

The January 8, 2002, order amended the cross reference following section (e).

2009 Orders

The September 10, 2009, order amended the cross reference following section (e).

2010 Orders

The March 9, 2010, order, amended the title of the rule; in subsecs. (b)(2) and (b)(3), substituted “if proved” for “if proven”; in subsecs. (b)(3), inserted “not subject to the procedures of Code, Criminal Procedure Article, § 8-201 “; inserted a new subsec. (d) and cross reference; redesignated former subsecs. (d) and (e) to be subsecs. (e) and (f); rewrote the new subsec. (f); and updated the source. The former subsection (e) previously read:

“(e) Disposition. The court may hold a hearing on any motion filed under this Rule and shall hold a hearing on a motion filed under section (c) if the motion satisfies the requirements of section (d) and a hearing was requested. The court may revise a judgment or set aside a verdict prior to entry of a judgment only on the record in open court. The court shall state its reasons for setting aside a judgment or verdict and granting a new trial.”

2012 Orders

The October 4, 2012, order added a new subsection (b)(2) concerning a motion filed pursuant to Code, Criminal Procedure Article, § 8-302; added language to clarify the time for filing a motion under section (c); and made stylistic changes.

2015 Orders

The December 7, 2015, order, deleted subsection (c)(2) and made stylistic changes.

Code, Criminal Procedure Article, §§ 6-105, 6-106, 11-104, and § 11-503.