holding that a lengthy and relentless diatribe directed at defendant's in-court demeanor during final argument improperly focused on the defendant’s neutral nontestimonial demeanor and thereby created an unreasonable inference of guilt
How later courts described this case
- holding that a lengthy and relentless diatribe directed at defendant's in-court demeanor during final argument improperly focused on the defendant’s neutral nontestimonial demeanor and thereby created an unreasonable inference of guilt
- holding that prosecutor’s argument on truthfulness of witness was reasonable deduction from witness’s testimonial demeanor, which is considered to be in evidence
- stating that that a trial court, by overruling an objection to an improper argument, puts “the stamp of judicial approval” on the improper comments, thus magnifying the possibility for harm
- stating that trial court, by overruling objection to improper argument, puts "the stamp of judicial approval" on improper comments, thus magnifying possibility for harm.
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
ONION, Presiding Judge,
concurring.
I concur in the result reached by the majority only based on the particular facts of this particular case.
WHITE, J., joins this opinion.