finding reversible misconduct when prosecution argued that “if you can’t take this evidence and find these defendants guilty on this evidence that [sic] we might as well open all the banks and say, ‘Come on and get the money, boys, because we’ll never be able to convict them’”
How later courts described this case
- finding reversible misconduct when prosecution argued that “if you can’t take this evidence and find these defendants guilty on this evidence that [sic] we might as well open all the banks and say, ‘Come on and get the money, boys, because we’ll never be able to convict them’”
- holding that it was improper for the prosecutor to tell the jury that if they acquit the defendant of bank robbery, that is like opening all the banks and saying, “Come on and get the money, boys, because we’ll never be able to convict them.”
- condemning prosecutor's statement that "if you can't ... find these defendants guilty on this evidence ... we might as well open all the banks and say, 'Come on and get the money, boys, because we'll never be able to convict them.' "
- noting that expert need not have certificates of training nor memberships in professional organizations, nor be an outstanding practitioner in the field in which he professes expertise
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
PHILLIPS, Chief Judge
(concurring in the result).
I agree that the convictions should be reversed and the case remanded for a new trial. Accordingly, I concur in the result.