Laney v. Sweeney

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that although the prosecutor’s statement improperly shifted the burden of proof onto the defendant, “because the evidence of guilt was overwhelming, it is unlikely that any prejudice surviving the [jury] instruction affected the outcome of the case”
• noting that “[n]ot every government-imposed choice in the criminal process that discourages the exercise of constitutional rights ... is prohibited”
• stating that to preserve objection to closing argument, counsel must raise the objection when the improper statement is made or within a reasonable time thereafter
• stating objection to closing argument not preserved unless raised when alleged improper statement is made, or within reasonable time thereafter
• finding no violation of defendant’s constitutional due process rights where trial court conditioned the defendant’s use of alternative source DNA evidence disclosed to State beyond discovery deadlines upon defendant agreeing to a continuance
• discussing effectiveness of curative instruction

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).