Following convictions at trial for multiple counts on an indictment, correspondence from a witness was sent to the trial judge after the verdict but prior to sentencing, alleging pressure relating to the witness’s testimony.
Counsel were invited to address whether the correspondence justified reopening the trial.
Applying the four-part test for reopening a criminal case after verdict, the court found the letter was unsworn, inconsistent with the witness’s sworn testimony, and not reasonably capable of belief.
The circumstances did not meet the stringent threshold required to reopen a concluded trial.
The trial was not reopened.
