Lisle v. State

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 prosecutor may SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 19 tO1 19471 argue that the jury must be accountable and do the right thing
• recognizing that this court presumes that juries follow district courts’ instructions
• holding prosecutor’s statements to the jury that it must be “accountable” and “do the right thing” were improper
• concluding that prosecutor's remarks 19 urging accountability do not amount to misconduct
• holding prosecutor’s statements to the jury that it must be “accountable” and “do the right thing” were improper
• vouching for the credibility of a witness is impermissible because it invades the jury’s function of assessing credibility

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).