Barany v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• defining fundamental error as error “so prejudicial to the rights of the defendant as to make a fair trial impossible”
• affirming jury’s verdict where “the medical experts were unanimous in concluding that appellant was insane at the time of the killing” but “the State offered testimony from several lay witnesses that indicated that appellant was sane”
• affirming jury’s verdict where “the medical experts were unanimous in concluding that appellant was insane at the time of the killing” but “the State offered testimony from several lay witnesses that indicated that appellant was sane”
• it must be so prejudicial to the rights of a defendant as to make a fair trial impossible
• error is “fundamental” if it is so prejudicial to the rights of the defendant that it makes a fair trial impossible
• “We have repeatedly held that the intent to kill may be inferred from the use of a deadly weapon; the nature, duration, or brutality of the attack; and the circumstances surrounding the crime.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).