Ray Jackson v. State of Florida

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 prosecutor’s comments made in rebuttal to the defense’s closing arguments, which “implicitly rebuked the defense’s closing arguments,” were, instead, “a fair response to defense counsel’s attack on the credibility of the State’s witnesses”
• explaining that although a prosecutor is allowed to critique and counter a theory of defense, a prosecutor may not denigrate or ridicule defense counsel or the theory of defense
• rejecting claim that trial counsel’s closing argument was deficient where trial counsel’s “logical” and “coherent” argument stressed the victim’s risky lifestyle in the context of arguing that numerous people other than the defendant could have caused the victim’s death
• noting it was improper for a prosecutor to state that defense counsel was “doing all they can to throw whatever they can against the wall to see what sticks” and cautioning against the prosecution “making comments that ridicule a defendant for presenting a defense”
• “[A] prosecutor may not ridicule a defendant or his theory of defense.” (quoting Servis v. State, 855 So. 2d 1190, 1194 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).