Martens Law Firm represented Mr. Griffith on his motion for a new trial. The Appellate Court stated regarding the motion for a new trial “The trial court abused its discretion in excluding highly relevant evidence about Winspur's possible impairment and intoxication during trial and when making tactical decisions about the case and then denied the motion for new trial on the basis that Griffith presented no evidence that Winspur was under the influence of alcohol during trial. As such, the denial of the motion for new trial was an abuse of discretion.”

Martens Law Firm represented Mr. Griffith on his motion for a new trial. All of this information is available from the court's ruling. The link to the courts ruling is here: http://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/nonpub/F065002.PDF