Legal Judgment Quotes

Juries are not qualified to judge questions of law, but they are very capable of judging questions of fact.

Why should the court impose a judgment in a case in which the SEC alleges a serious securities fraud, but the defendant neither admits nor denies wrongdoing?

For every crime that comes before him, a judge is required to complete a perfect syllogism in which the major premise must be the general law; the minor, the action that conforms or does not conform to the law; and the conclusion, acquittal or punishment. If the judge were constrained, or if he desired to frame even a single additional syllogism, the door would thereby be opened to uncertainty.

The role of the judge is simply to decide cases.

A Judge must bear in mind that when he tries a case he is himself on trial.

Do not give sentence in another tribunal till you have been yourself judged in the tribunal of Justice.

I believe indeterminate sentencing can be extremely useful, but I also believe that any such system should always take into consideration the special knowledge as to the facts in a case which only the trial judge possesses.

The obligation of any judge is to decide the case before the court, and the nature of the issue presented will largely determine the appropriate scope of the principle on which its decision should rest.

For every criminal case, the judge must construct a perfect syllogism: the major premise must be the general law; the minor premise, whether or not the action in question is in compliance with the law; and the conclusion, acquittal or punishment.

The state in commissioning its judges has commanded them to judge, but neither in constitution nor in statute has it formulated a code to define the manner of their judging.

For all laws are general judgments, or sentences of the legislator; as also every particular judgment is a law to him whose case is judged.

I'm not the kind of judge where you get away with everything, because I know my basics. But I'm the judge where, if you emotionally capture me, then you've got me, I'm in your team.

I don't suggest we ought to be able to pressure judges, but we ought to be able to criticize [them] when we think they've made a mistake

Had the jury convicted on proper instructions it would be the end of the matter. But juries are not bound by what seems inescapable logic to judges.

When a person is found less guilty than he is suspected, he is concluded more innocent than he really is.

Good Christian people, I am come hither to die, for according to the law, and by the law I am judged to die, and therefore I will speak nothing against it. I am come hither to accuse no man, nor to speak anything of that, whereof I am accused and condemned to die.

I take it that the judgment is an essential point in every conviction, let the punishment be fixed or not.

I think that sometimes the most intelligent things that prosecutors do is when they exercise their discretion not to go forward with a case.

there shall be in every court, three justices or commissioners, who shall sit with the twelve men of the neighborhood, with them to hear all causes, and to assist the said twelve men of the neighborhood in case of law; and that they the said justices shall pronounce such judgment as they shall receive from, and be directed by the said twelve men in whom only the judgment resides, and not otherwise.

… it [is] a judge's duty to decide, not to debate.

A judge is supposed to be able to make a decision, and when you make a decision, very often one party - and very often both - are a little disappointed.

Most people assume that when you go to court and win your case that you are guaranteed to get your money. Sadly, this isn't always the case.

My job is to investigate whether or not a crime is committed, can be proved and should be charged. I'm not going to comment on what to make beyond that. You know, it's not my jurisdiction, not my job, not my judgment.

What individual can so well assess the amount of damages which a plaintiff ought to recover for an injury he has received than an intelligent jury?