Liggett v. People

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that the prosecution may not ask a witness to opine on the veracity of another witness’s testimony
• holding questions about whether a witness was “mistaken” and whether a witness was lying are improper
• holding questions asking one witness whether another witness was “mistaken” are improper
• presuming that trial court did not ‘‘accord weight to the [prosecutor’s] improper Page 100 CONNECTICUT LAW JOURNAL November 30, 2021 844 NOVEMBER, 2021 339 Conn. 820 State v. Roy D. L. statements in its decision’’ during bench trial
• “[A]sking a witness to opine on the veracity of another witness is prejudicial, argumentative, and ultimately invades the province of the fact-finder.”
• “[A]sking a witness to opine on the veracity of another witness is prejudicial, argumentative, 20 and ultimately invades the province of the fact-finder.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).