State v. Firth

Supreme Court of Rhode Island

State v. Firth

379 A.2d 931, 119 R.I. 921, 1977 R.I. LEXIS 1970

CourtSupreme Court of Rhode Island

DecidedOctober 13, 1977

DocketM. P. No. 77-213

StatusPublished

This text of 379 A.2d 931 (State v. Firth) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Rhode Island primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Firth, 379 A.2d 931, 119 R.I. 921, 1977 R.I. LEXIS 1970 (R.I. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

This case comes before us on a Rule 9 motion for release pending appeal. For that reason we do not review the action of the trial justice, but rather hear the motion de novo. The record supplied to us set forth the reasons for the trial justice’s denial of bail pending appeal, and although his findings are not binding on us they are entitled to great weight if supported by competent evidence of probative force. See Quattrocchi v. Langlois, 100 R.I. 741, 219 A.2d 570 (1966). On examination of the record supplied by the parties, we agree with the trial justice’s findings that the defendant’s release would pose a threat to the community and that the severity of the sentence might cause the defendant to remove himself from the jurisdiction of the court. Accordingly, we deny the defendant’s motion for release on bail pending appeal.

Chief Justice Bevilacqua did not participate.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

This case comes before us on a Rule 9 motion for release pending appeal. For that reason we do not review the action of the trial justice, but rather hear the motion de novo. The record supplied to us set forth the reasons for the trial justice’s denial of bail pending appeal, and although his findings are not binding on us they are entitled to great weight if supported by competent evidence of probative force. See Quattrocchi v. Langlois, 100 R.I. 741, 219 A.2d 570 (1966). On examination of the record supplied by the parties, we agree with the trial justice’s findings that the defendant’s release would pose a threat to the community and that the severity of the sentence might cause the defendant to remove himself from the jurisdiction of the court. Accordingly, we deny the defendant’s motion for release on bail pending appeal.

Chief Justice Bevilacqua did not participate.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

379 A.2d 931, 119 R.I. 921, 1977 R.I. LEXIS 1970, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-firth-ri-1977.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack