parties have wide latitude in closing argument to discuss the evidence and reasonable inferences from the evidence
How later courts described this case
- parties have wide latitude in closing argument to discuss the evidence and reasonable inferences from the evidence
- expert testimony regarding a defendant's prison behavior admissible as mitigation to rebut continuing threat aggravating circumstance
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
LILE, Vice Presiding Judge:
concurs in results.
T1 Clearly, the trial court should have allowed defense counsel's questions designed to determine which, if any, prospective jurors would automatically impose the death sentence for intentional murder. Morgan v. Illinois, 504 U.S. 719 , 112 S.Ct. 2222 , 119 L.Ed.2d 492 . This error requires re-sentencing. However, the legal analysis concerning prospective juror Fulfaro and juror McNeil is flawed. Frederick v. State, 2001OK CR 34, 37 P.3d 908 ; Ross v.Oklahoma, 1986 OK CR 49 , 717 P.2d 117 ; Ross v. Oklohoma, 487 U.S. 81 , 108 S.Ct. 2273 , 101 L.Ed.2d 80 (1988).