Joseph Cherima v. State of Florida

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that an officer’s prejudicial statement was harmless error given the strong evidence of defendant’s guilt and the fact that defense counsel did not seek a limiting instruction to address the comment
• cautioning against “assigning critical significance to the failure of a different jury, which heard different evidence and argument, to reach agreement”
• district court erred in allowing officer who lacked sufficient experience to testify it is common for drug users to carry weapons
• permissible for officer to testify that it is common for drug traffickers to carry weapons for protection
• “[T]rial judges generally rely on the structural check of cross-examination in permitting opinion testimony with a weak foundation . . . .”
• it is \standard\ practice to tell jurors as much

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).