A directed verdict is a ruling handed down from a judge in a trial to the jury to render an opinion in favor of one of the parties involved in the case without requiring the jury to deliberate further. This is usually done when a judge determines that the evidence presented in the case does not support a conviction or the defense case has merit and should not be required to go to trial. By issuing a directed verdict, the judge is providing an immediate decision and avoiding further delays in the matter.
The Purpose of a Directed Verdict
The purpose of a directed verdict is to ensure that justice is served with the least possible delay. A judge may make this decision if there is insufficient evidence to support a conviction or if the defense has successfully proven its case without requiring the jury to deliberate further. This eliminates the need for an extended court process and allows the judge to make a swift, impartial decision based on the law and the facts of the case.
Modern Exercise of Direct Verdict
In 2011, for example, the Court of Appeals of Maryland directed a verdict in a case that was a breach of contract dispute. The judge found that the evidence presented did not support the plaintiff’s case and directed a verdict in favor of the defendant, thus avoiding a prolonged court process.
The Bottom Line
A directed verdict is a decision made by a judge in a trial to end the case by providing an immediate ruling without requiring a jury to deliberate further. This tool is used to ensure that justice is served swiftly and without delay while taking into consideration the details of the case as provided by the evidence. Directed verdicts have become increasingly common in recent years as courts look to find ways to expedite justice.