Aguilar Land Asso. v. Commissioner

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• explaining the “critical” distinction between a jury permissibly finding actual knowledge through circumstantial evidence and impermissibly finding a defendant constructively “should have known”
• prosecutor repeatedly misstated the element of actual knowledge as being met if the defendant “should have known.”
• “[T]he ‘should have known’ standard is incorrect; the jury must find that Allen actually knew Clemmons was going to murder the four police officers.”
• “To pass constitutional muster, the jury must find actual knowledge but may make such a finding with circumstantial evidence.”
• where the prosecutor repeatedly misstated the law with regard to \knowledge\ and accomplice liability, the court found a substantial likelihood that the misconduct had prejudiced the defendant
• when a trial court overrules the defense’s timely objection to the State’s mischaracterization of a legal standard, it can “potentially lead[] the jury to believe that the . . . [mischaracterization] was a proper interpretation of law”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).