NOELLIEN v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it limited defense counsel's closing argument when it determined that the argument requested by counsel was more likely to confuse than enlighten the jury
• “LBJias must be specific to the case, arising from a self-interest or self-preservation motive that could be reasonably inferred to cause testimony to be shaded or distorted.” (punctuation omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).