Commonwealth v. Sasse

How courts have described this case

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

• holding the appellant waived challenges to statements in Commonwealth’s closing argument where the appellant objected after the argument but failed to object or move for a mistrial during the argument
• stating, “[i]n order to preserve a claim of prosecutorial misconduct for appeal, a defendant must make an objection and move for a mistrial” (citation omitted)
• excluding testimony regarding a witness’s prior alcohol abuse and promiscuity in light of the danger it would be used to improperly discredit the witness’s testimony
• stating evidentiary matters are reviewed under abuse of discretion standard; holding court did not err in excluding untimely expert evidence of insanity
• “In order to preserve a claim of prosecutorial misconduct for appeal, a defendant must make an objection and move for a mistrial.”
• mistrial claim waived where appellant did not challenge prosecutor’s statement until after closing argument

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).