People v. Lesslie

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that “expert testimony was not needed simply to describe or interpret” certain facts, particularly when the jury heard ample testimony from numerous witnesses as to such facts
• “[A]n expert testifying as to issues of law may not . . . simply tell the jury what result to reach.”
• defendant had a reasonable expectation of privacy in a bar restroom despite \the potential for a bystander to overhear\
• Because unproven accusations of criminal behavior do not, by themselves, raise an inference of improper actions, \an arrest or a pending criminal charge generally is an improper subject for impeachment.\
• expert witness may not “simply tell the jury what result to reach”
• \simply because a person allows one conversation to be overheard by nearby individuals does not mean that the expectation of freedom from electronic reception by [any individual] is objectively unreasonable\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).