Brignardello v. Cooper

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that the prosecutor’s twenty-seven references to “the victim” during the evidentiary phase of the trial, combined with use of the term throughout closing argument, was improper but not prejudicial such as to warrant a new trial
• finding that the prosecutor’s twenty-seven references to “the victim” during the evidentiary phase of the trial, combined with use of the term throughout closing argument, was improper but not prejudicial such as to warrant a new trial
• distinguishing Warholic and Rodriguez and holding that prosecutor’s reference to the complainant as ‘‘the victim’’ approximately twenty-seven times was improper
• \[e]vidence that bolsters a witness' credibility before it has come under attack is prohibited\ [internal quotation marks omitted]
• use of term ‘‘victim’’ by prosecutor was central to critical issue of case, specifically whether defendant was acting in self-defense
• prosecutor’s use of term ‘‘victim’’ twenty- seven times, although sufficient to constitute an impro- priety, did not satisfy third Williams factor because uses of term ‘‘were infrequent when compared to the entirety’’ of two week trial and 1000 pages of transcript

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).