White v. State, 298 P.3d 884

White was found guilty of fourth-degree assault by a jury.
White moved for a new trial under Alaska Criminal Rule 33(a) asserting the verdict was against the weight of the evidence.
The district court denied the motion but the written decision suggests it used the wrong legal test.
Alaska law requires weighing the evidence and witness credibility independently of the jury’s view and only grants a new trial if the verdict is plainly unreasonable and unjust.
The district court relied on both the plainly unreasonable and unjust test and an any-evidentiary-basis test; this court vacates and remands for reconsideration using the correct standard.
The court states it does not retain jurisdiction and remands for reconsideration of White’s motion.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
What is the proper standard for a new trial on weight of the evidence?	White argues the district court applied the wrong test.	(White as defendant) - not explicitly stated beyond the district court’s error; the court must apply the weight-and-credibility standard.	Remand to apply correct standard.

Taylor v. State, 262 P.3d 232 (Alaska App.2011) (judge weighs evidence independently; new trial only if plainly unreasonable and unjust)
Howell v. State, 917 P.2d 1202 (Alaska App.1996) (cites improper standard formulations in weight-of-evidence rulings)
Hogg v. Raven Contractors, Inc., 134 P.3d 349 (Alaska 2006) (supports proper standard for reviewing weight-of-evidence issues)
Kava v. American Honda Motor Co., 48 P.3d 1170 (Alaska 2002) (discusses standards of review in related civil context)
Amidon v. State, 565 P.2d 1248 (Alaska 1977) (cites longstanding principles on weight-of-evidence determinations)