holding trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying murder defendant’s challenge to prosecutor’s remarks that defendant failed to present medical evidence to corroborate claim of disability where defendant chose to present his girlfriend to testify that he was physically incapable of firing a gun
How later courts described this case
- holding trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying murder defendant’s challenge to prosecutor’s remarks that defendant failed to present medical evidence to corroborate claim of disability where defendant chose to present his girlfriend to testify that he was physically incapable of firing a gun
- stating that a prosecutor’s claim that a defense attorney was attempting to “shoot the messenger” in a case involving the killing of a witness was not prejudicial to the defendant as to render the jury incapable of delivering a fair verdict
- rejecting claim that the trial court erred by refusing to instruct the jury that it could infer a “consciousness of innocence” from the defendant’s post-arrest cooperation with police, particularly where no consciousness of guilt instruction had been given
- holding that specific intent to kill, as well as malice, can be inferred from the use of a deadly weapon upon a vital part of the victim’s body.
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
Justice SAYLOR,
concurring.
I join the majority opinion, except the discussion of the prosecutor’s “shoot the messenger” remark. See Majority Opinion at 338-39. In my judgment, the trial court erred in failing to sustain the defense objection. I agree with the majority that the prosecutor’s follow-up ■ commentary was inappropriate as well, and with the majority’s assessment in terms of impact on the verdict. See id.