People v. Lane

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 comments during closing argument were not improper because the prosecutor did not “urge the jury to suspend its powers of judgment” and find the defendant guilty on the basis of sympathy for the victim
• stating that the use of cadaver dogs is “not significantly different from other forms of dog tracking evidence”
• stating that the use of cadaver dogs is “not significantly different from other forms of dog tracking evidence”
• explaining that we must review the prosecutor’s improper comments “in context and in light of the defendant’s arguments”
• explaining that a prosecutor commits misconduct if he or she abandons the responsibility to seek justice and denies the defendant a fair and impartial trial
• holding the foundational components for tracking dog evidence are also applicable to cadaver dog evidence

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).