The Pennsylvania Superior Court reversed one of the rarest orders: the grant of a new trial because the verdict was against the weight of the evidence. The case centered around a marriage gone wrong in which the defendant shot and killed his wife during a heated argument. He claimed self defense and diminished capacity because he was drunk and high on cocaine at the time of the crime. Both sides presented psychological experts. After a jury convicted the defendant of first-degree murder (for the second time), the trial court granted a new trial based on a weight claim because the Commonwealth’s expert had given false testimony, and his opinion was rendered incompetent when he testified to facts not supported by the record. The Superior Court’s recitation of the facts required facts nearly 15 pages. The Court held that the trial court erred when it found that the defendant was unfairly surprised by the expert’s testimony.
