People v. Pedroza
Annotate this CaseDefendant was convicted of first degree murder and conspiracy to commit murder. Defendant was then granted a motion for a new trial where the evidence corroborating an accomplice was insufficient. The trial court subsequently granted defendant's motion for dismissal on the basis of double jeopardy. The People appealed. The court concluded that the trial court ruled there was insufficient evidence as a matter of law, and this ruling constituted an acquittal; because the acquittal occurred after the jury rendered a guilty verdict, the dismissal order is appealable; in light of the proceedings, the court cannot accept the People's argument that the court granted the motion for a new trial based on a reweighing of the evidence as a 13th juror; in ruling on the motion to dismiss, the trial court clarified that the order granting the motion for new trial was based on legally insufficient evidence; and, as such, retrial was barred, and the order granting a new trial could have no effect. The court also concluded that double jeopardy principles do not bar appellate review of the dismissal order or the new trial. Further, the trial court did not err in concluding that the evidence was insufficient as a matter of law and the trial court did not err in dismissing the case. Accordingly, the court affirmed the trial court's orders.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.