Pantano 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 it is improper to 20 “appeal[ ] to juror sympathies by diverting their attention from evidence relevant to the elements necessary to sustain a conviction”
• concluding that stating \there's no doubt he's guilty\ improperly expressed the prosecutor's personal opinion
• stating that \failure to specifically object on the grounds urged on appeal preclude[s] appellate consideration on the grounds not raised below\
• concluding that it was misconduct for the prosecutor to argue for the jury to find the defendant guilty in order to make the parents of the victim feel better, as making the parents feel better was not an element of the crimes charged
• observing that “ ‘the Confrontation Clause guarantees an opportunity for effective cross-examination, not cross-examination that is effective in whatever way, and to whatever extent, the defense might wish’ ” (quoting Delaware v. Van Arsdall, 475 U.S. 673, 679 (1986
• noting prosecutors have reasonable latitude to argue witness credibility when outcome depends on witnesses' truthfulness, \even if this means occasionally stating in argument that a witness is lying\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).