Opinion

Malaske v. State

  • 75 O.B.A.J. 1498
  • 89 P.3d 1116
  • 2004 OK CR 18
  • 2004 Okla. Crim. App. LEXIS 21
  • 2004 WL 842436
Court
Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma
Filed
Apr 21, 2004
Status
Published
Author
Strubhar
On the bench
Lumpkin, Johnson, Lile, Chapel, Strubhar
Cited by
16 cases

The opinion

STRUBHAR, J.,

dissenting.

¶ 1 I dissent. I find merit in Proposition III. The prosecutor, in his closing arguments, made a continuing series of improper arguments. The prosecutor’s confrontational and bullying approach directed towards the defense attorney was not only inappropriate but absurd; however, when the defense counsel objected, the trial court improperly overruled the objection. Additionally, the prosecutor misstated the law on several significant occasions. These errors cannot be considered harmless. I would reverse and remand for a new trial.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.