R.I. Super. Ct. R. Crim. P. 33
On motion of the defendant the court may grant a new trial to the defendant if required in the interest of justice. If trial was by the court without a jury, the court on motion of a defendant for a new trial may vacate the judgment, take additional testimony, and direct the entry of a new judgment. A motion for a new trial based on newly discovered evidence may be made only within three (3) years after the entry of judgment by the court, but if an appeal is pending, the court may grant the motion only on remand of the case. A motion for a new trial based on any other grounds shall be made within ten (10) days after the verdict or finding of guilty or within such further time as the court may fix during the ten-day period. A copy of the motion for a new trial shall be filed with the clerk of the court.
R.I. Super. Ct. R. Crim. P. 33
2002 Committee Notes
There are two changes to Rule 33. The first permits the court to order a new trial for error of law committed at the trial. This change brings the Rhode Island rule into harmony with those of the vast majority of state jurisdictions and the federal courts. It is not intended nor anticipated that the ability to raise an error of law on a motion for a new trial will change the current practice regarding motions to suppress evidence on constitutional grounds. Nor is it anticipated that the rule will change the harmless error, plain error, or contemporaneous objection rules generally applicable to trials.
As currently written, the time for filing a motion for new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence runs from the "entry of judgment." In order to avoid confusion regarding whether this triggering event refers to action taken by the Supreme Court or the Superior Court following an appeal, which would result in great disparity in the amount of time available to a defendant to file timely a motion for new trial, the amendment uses the trial court's verdict or finding of guilty as the triggering event. The time to file a motion for new trial based on newly discovered evidence is increased to three years to compensate for what might have resulted in less time than that currently allowed in the rule for filing such motions. The change brings the rule in harmony with the federal rule and furthers internal consistency within the rule itself, inasmuch as the time for filing a motion for new trial on any other ground currently runs from that same event.
The remaining changes are stylistic and are not intended to substantively change the rule.
1972 Notes
Rule 33 is principally the same as its federal counterpart with two major differences. First, a new trial may not be granted in the Superior Court for errors of law which occurred during the trial. This accords with present Rhode Island practice. See G.L. 1956 (1969 Reenactment), § 9-23-1 Supp.1970); State v. Papa, 32 R.I. 453, 80 A. 12 (1911); cf. Kent, Rhode Island Practice 435-36(1969). Second, the motion based on other than discovery of new evidence must be made within ten days, rather than seven days as under the federal rule.
The rule differs from existing Rhode Island practice in two significant respects. Most importantly, the rule greatly enlarges the time in which a new trial motion on the ground of newly discovered evidence may be made. Under existing Rhode Island law in cases tried by a jury, motions for a new trial on any available ground, including newly discovered evidence, must be made within ten days after verdict (G.L.1956 (1969 Reenactment), § 9-23-1 (Supp.1970)) and in nonjury cases within seven days (G.L.1956 (1969 Reenactment), § 9-23-2 )). These provisions are partially mitigated, however, by G.L.1956 (1969 Reenactment), § 9-21-6 which authorizes the Supreme Court, within one year of entry of judgment, to allow a motion for a new trial to be made upon the ground, among others, of newly discovered evidence. Rule 33 would permit the motion for new trial on this ground to be made in the Superior Court within two years of entry by that court of judgment pursuant to Rule 32, but would require new trial motions on all other grounds to be made within ten days after verdict or within such time as the court may set during the ten day period.
A second difference is the grounds upon which a new trial motion may be made in a non-jury case. Under G.L. 1956 (1969 Reenactment), § 9-23-2 the only ground for a new trial in a case tried by the court is newly discovered evidence. See Thrift v. Thrift, 30 R.I. 456, 76 A. 105 (1910). Under this rule, any of the grounds available in a jury trial would also support a new trial motion in a non-jury case.
In all other respects the proposed rule accords with existing Rhode Island practice. The requirement of G.L.1956 (1969 Reenactment), § 9-23-1 (Supp.1970) that the motion "state the grounds relied upon" is covered by the requirement of Rule 47 that motions, other than those made during trial, be in writing and state the grounds upon which they are made.