A directed verdict is a procedural tool in Georgia’s courts allowing a judge to rule for a party before the case goes to a jury, which can end the trial early. Its use is governed by specific legal standards and timing. Understanding how it works in Georgia’s courts shows its influence on trial results, judicial responsibilities, and appeal options.
Typical Filing Stage
In Georgia, a party can request a directed verdict only at certain points during a trial, after the other side has presented its evidence. In civil trials, the defendant can move for a directed verdict once the plaintiff finishes presenting their case. If this motion isn’t made or is denied, the defendant can file another motion after all evidence from both sides is in. The plaintiff has similar chances at the end of the defendant’s evidence or when all evidence is complete.
This timing is similar in criminal cases. The defense can move for a directed verdict of acquittal after the prosecution presents its evidence. If denied, the trial proceeds, and either party can again move for a directed verdict after all evidence, including any rebuttal, is presented but before the case is submitted to the jury.
Legal Standards
A motion for a directed verdict claims the opposing party’s evidence is not legally strong enough to support a judgment for them. The standards for this decision differ slightly between civil and criminal cases.
In civil cases, Georgia law (O.C.G.A. Section 9-11-50) requires a directed verdict if “there is no conflict in the evidence as to any material issue and the evidence introduced, with all reasonable deductions therefrom, shall demand a particular verdict.”1Justia Law. Georgia Code § 9-11-50 (2024) – Motions for Directed Verdict and for Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict This means the evidence must be so one-sided that only one outcome is reasonably possible. The court must consider the evidence in the light most favorable to the party against whom the motion is made. A directed verdict is granted only if the evidence clearly demands a specific result, not just because the judge thinks one side has a stronger case.
In criminal cases, the standard (O.C.G.A. Section 17-9-1) concerns acquittal.2Justia Law. Georgia Code § 17-9-1 (2024) – Directed Verdict of Acquittal in Criminal Cases A judge may direct an acquittal if “there is no conflict in the evidence and the evidence introduced with all reasonable deductions and inferences therefrom shall demand a verdict of acquittal.” This means the prosecution’s evidence, even when viewed most favorably to the State, is so weak that no reasonable jury could find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The motion essentially argues the State has not met its legal burden of proof. If there is any evidence that could support a conviction, the case proceeds to the jury.
Role of the Judge
When a motion for a directed verdict is made, the judge evaluates if the evidence presented by one party, when viewed in the light most favorable to them, could legally support a verdict in their favor. This is a legal assessment of the evidence’s sufficiency, not a judgment on witness credibility or a weighing of conflicting evidence, as those are tasks for the jury.
The judge reviews the trial record. If the evidence so strongly favors one side that no reasonable juror could find otherwise, the judge must direct the verdict. This process ensures that only cases with genuine factual disputes go to the jury. In criminal cases, if the State’s evidence doesn’t establish a basic case for each element of the crime, the judge must grant the motion and acquit the defendant. Although the law might say a judge “may direct” a verdict, Georgia courts see it as a duty to grant a directed verdict of acquittal if the evidence requires it; not doing so can lead to reversal on appeal. The judge’s decision must be made before the jury gives its verdict, and the court can also order an acquittal on its own if the evidence is clearly insufficient.
Influence on Court Proceedings
A motion for a directed verdict can change the course of court proceedings. If granted, it ends the trial, or part of it, before the jury deliberates. The case, or certain claims, will conclude due to a judge’s finding that the evidence is legally insufficient, an order that doesn’t need jury approval.
Even if a motion is denied, it can influence the trial. The arguments and the court’s reasoning might lead parties to change their strategies, such as focusing on challenged areas of proof or highlighting evidence the court deemed adequate.
In complex cases with many claims or defendants, a directed verdict can simplify the trial. A judge might grant it for some civil claims while others continue, or for specific criminal charges or defendants if the evidence against them is lacking. This makes litigation more efficient. If a motion made after all evidence is presented is denied, Georgia law permits the moving party, after a judgment, to renew their motion. This is known as a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV), asking the judge to reconsider the evidence’s legal sufficiency after the verdict.
Possible Appeals
Decisions on motions for a directed verdict in Georgia can be appealed, with different procedures depending on whether the motion was granted or denied. If a judge grants a directed verdict, resulting in a final judgment, the losing party can appeal. The appeal will argue that the trial judge made a mistake in evaluating the evidence. Appellate courts use a de novo review, meaning they examine the evidence anew, in the light most favorable to the party who opposed the motion, to decide if the directed verdict was legally required.
The denial of a directed verdict is an interlocutory order, which means it is not immediately appealable.3Justia Law. Georgia Code § 5-6-34 (2020) – Procedure for Review of Interlocutory Orders The party whose motion was denied must wait until after a final judgment is entered. If unhappy with the trial’s result, they can then appeal the final judgment and list the denial of their directed verdict motion as an error. The appellate review standard is also de novo. If the appellate court determines the motion should have been granted, it can reverse the trial court’s judgment.
In criminal cases, the State’s power to appeal a directed verdict of acquittal is restricted by double jeopardy protections, which prevent a person from being tried twice for the same crime.4Justia Law. Georgia Code § 16-1-7 (2020) – Multiple Prosecutions for the Same Conduct (Double Jeopardy) The State cannot appeal a pre-verdict acquittal to retry the defendant. However, Georgia law (O.C.G.A. Section 5-7-1) allows the State to appeal if a motion for a directed verdict of acquittal is granted after a jury has already returned a guilty verdict.5Justia Law. Georgia Code § 5-7-1 (2020) – State’s Right to Appeal in Criminal Cases A successful appeal by the State in this situation can restore the guilty verdict without a new trial. If a defendant’s motion for acquittal is denied and they are convicted, they can appeal the conviction, claiming the State’s evidence was not legally sufficient. The appellate court reviews all trial evidence, viewed most favorably to the State, to see if any reasonable jury could have found guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.