People v. Edelbacher

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that, when shoe tracks were visible from the normal route used by visitors when visiting a home, a constitutional violation did not occur
• finding that, when shoe tracks were visible from the normal route used by visitors when visiting a home, a constitutional violation did not occur
• rejecting a similar argument and reasoning that “[p]roof of actual pecuniary benefit” is unnecessary because “the relevant inquiry is whether the defendant committed the murder in the expectation” of financial gain (quoting People v. Howard, 749 P.2d 279, 298 (Cal. 1988))
• “prosecutorial comment in argument on an accused’s courtroom demeanor ... [was not prohibited where] the defendant has testified and put his credibility in issue.”
• “Comment on a defendant’s demeanor as a witness is clearly proper[.]”
• \Comment on a defendant's demeanor as a witness is clearly proper[.]\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).