how do cases get re-opened after the appeals period ends?

[S Wanzal]

Jurisdiction

Washington

Hi. A statute says "Every action may be brought in the county where the minor children are then residing or where the parent of the minor child is then residing". Obviously, these sentences are grammatically wrong. The word "then" does not make sense". Correct would either be "in the county where the minor children WERE then residing", or "in the county where the minor children are NOW residing". But I suspect that this is not a grammatical error but legalese. But which one does it mean? Thank you



I know there are some situations where years or even decades later a case is being re-opened due to new advances in technology like DNA testing. I am wondering what the legal mechanism is to do so. My understanding is that there is only a limited time during which a case can be appealed and if that has not occurred that there is no more recourse. And yet, some cases are being reopened and re-tried. What is the term for this legal procedure and what are the steps involved? Thank you

 

[Zigner]

I know there are some situations where years or even decades later a case is being re-opened due to new advances in technology like DNA testing. I am wondering what the legal mechanism is to do so. My understanding is that there is only a limited time during which a case can be appealed and if that has not occurred that there is no more recourse. And yet, some cases are being reopened and re-tried. What is the term for this legal procedure and what are the steps involved? Thank you

The term you are looking for is "Attorney"

 

[Zigner]

Hi. A statute says "Every action may be brought in the county where the minor children are then residing or where the parent of the minor child is then residing". Obviously, these sentences are grammatically wrong. The word "then" does not make sense". Correct would either be "in the county where the minor children WERE then residing", or "in the county where the minor children are NOW residing". But I suspect that this is not a grammatical error but legalese. But which one does it mean? Thank you

It's not grammatically incorrect. "Then" means "at the time the action is filed".

 

[zddoodah]

I know there are some situations where years or even decades later a case is being re-opened

Please explain/clarify what sort of "case" you're talking about and what "re-opened" means in this context.

My understanding is that there is only a limited time during which a case can be appealed and if that has not occurred that there is no more recourse. And yet, some cases are being reopened and re-tried. What is the term for this legal procedure and what are the steps involved?

First, while it's not clear what you're talking about, explaining "the steps involved" would be way beyond the scope of an internet message board.

Second, in a criminal case, if a defendant is tried and acquitted, that's it. There is nothing to "re-open" (and criminal prosecutors don't generally appeal acquittals). If a defendant is tried and convicted and did not appeal, then the only available option falls under the heading of "post-conviction relief," which most commonly means habeas corpus proceedings. That's a subject about which many books have been written, so you're going to need to be more focused with your inquiry.

 

[zddoodah]

A statute says

What statute?

"Every action may be brought in the county where the minor children are then residing or where the parent of the minor child is then residing". Obviously, these sentences are grammatically wrong.

First of all, you only quoted one sentence, so it's not clear what "these sentences" refers to. Second, there's nothing whatsoever grammatically incorrect about the sentence you quoted.

The word "then" does not make sense".

Sure it does. I'll re-phrase the quoted sentence: "Every action may be brought in either (a) the county where the minor children reside at the time the action is brought or (b) the county where the parent of the minor child resides at the time the action is brought."

Correct would either be "in the county where the minor children WERE then residing", or "in the county where the minor children are NOW residing".

The first of these is incorrect, and the second would be ambiguous because it would be unclear what "now" meant (the grammatically reasonable interpretation would be be that it meant the time when the statute was enacted, but that would lead to absurd results).

I suspect that this is not a grammatical error but legalese.

It's neither.

 

[S Wanzal]

I suspect that this is not a grammatical error but legalese.

 

[justblue]

I suspect that this is not a grammatical error but legalese.

You are wrong.

 

[Tax Counsel]

Hi. A statute says "Every action may be brought in the county where the minor children are then residing or where the parent of the minor child is then residing". Obviously, these sentences are grammatically wrong. The word "then" does not make sense". Correct would either be "in the county where the minor children WERE then residing", or "in the county where the minor children are NOW residing". But I suspect that this is not a grammatical error but legalese. But which one does it mean?

The word "then" is correct. The word "then" relates back to the phrase "every action may be brought" and thus tells you that where the child or the parent resides at the time the action is filed is what matters, not "now" or some unidentified prior point in time. So, as explained to you earlier, the statute means that the action may be filed in the county where either (a) the minor children or (b) the parent of the minor child reside on the date the action is filed.

What does this question have to do with criminal law?

I know there are some situations where years or even decades later a case is being re-opened due to new advances in technology like DNA testing. I am wondering what the legal mechanism is to do so. My understanding is that there is only a limited time during which a case can be appealed and if that has not occurred that there is no more recourse. And yet, some cases are being reopened and re-tried. What is the term for this legal procedure and what are the steps involved? Thank you

After the criminal appeals have run their course generally it is not possible to "reopen" the case. But there can be options to collaterally attack the judgment to obtain the relief sought. A collateral attack is not a reopening of the criminal case but rather bringing a different action that has the effect of attacking the judgment. For example, if the criminal conviction or sentence in some way violated the defendant's federal constitutional rights the defendant might bring a writ of habeus corpus action to get the conviction or sentence overturned. The avenues for collateral attack are very narrow and thus most criminal defendants will not be able to succeed in bringing such an action.

 

[army judge]

The greatest of the GREAT WRITS has no time bar.

Relief via the GREAT WRIT can be sought in state or federal Court.

Alas, the GREAT WRIT is akin to football's "Hail Mary" pass.