American Samoa Gov’t v. Tiumalu,

AMERICAN SAMOA GOVERNMENT, Plaintiff

v.

ASUELU TIUMALU, Defendant

High Court of American Samoa
Trial Division

CR No. 6-95

June 29, 1995

__________

[1] The 10-day time period mandated by A.S.C.A. § 46.2402(a) for filing a motion for new trial does not begin to accrue until the defendant is sentenced.

[2] The court will treat a motion for new trial, which was filed after verdict but before sentencing, as being timely filed.

Before RICHMOND, Associate Justice, TAUANU`U, Chief Associate Judge, and ATIULAGI, Associate Judge.

Counsel: For Plaintiff, Frederick J. O`Brien, Assistant Attorney General
For Defendant, Reginald E. Gates, Assistant Public Defender

Order Denying Motion for New Trial:

[1-2] On May 22, 1995, the defendant was found guilty by jury verdict of the crime of assault in the first degree, as a Class B felony. Defendant prematurely filed a motion for new trial on June 1, 1995. The 10-day time period mandated by A.S.C.A. § 46.2402(a) for filing a motion for new trial did not begin to accrue until the defendant was sentenced on June 12, 1995. The motion came regularly for hearing on June 26, 1995. Defendant and both counsel were present. We considered the motion to have been properly filed as of June 12, 1995.

Defendant argues that the evidence was insufficient because his conviction was inconsistent with the acquittal of one of his three co-defendants, and that he was prejudiced by the late availability of a Hawaii hospital report containing information which may have been relevant to impeach the victim and the causes and seriousness of his injuries. Both arguments are without merit.

The motion for a new trial is denied.

It is so ordered.

*********