(10-12-2019, 07:23 PM)Kris Kringle Wrote: Who determines when "all evidence of possible mitigating circumstances" has been submitted?

I'll point to the existing language:

Quote:3. Case Procedure
(6) Once the assigned justice has all necessary information and evidence, they will analyze the question with all deliberate speed to deliver an opinion. Any individuals involved in the crafting of the opinion must be named within it. The opinion must be approved by another justice not recused from the case.

In other words, it would still be up to the judge. This language is rather a general guideline/statement of intent. It is primarily there to help interpret the rest of the judicial act to prevent misinterpretations or creative interpretations leading to new procedures that would harm the integrity/purpose of the court.

Furthermore, I believe that generally, I the judge were to ask for submission of all evidence (perhaps specifically requesting potential mitigating evidence as well) before a reasonable deadline, this requirement would be fully satisfied, so this language should never be able to affect normal court cases, unless procedure were significantly altered in ways that the legislature has not envisioned or provided a legal basis for.

It should only ever be relevant in cases of absolutely egregious misconduct or to more easily facilitate an appeal in cases where it can be shown that evidence of significant mitigating circumstances was not submitted before (or perhaps not available before). But in this case, the language of section 6.3. applies again, so the court would be able to dismiss appeals that are frivolous, meritless or in bad faith and possibly penalise people if necessary.