Rosso 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 denigrating insanity defense was inappropriate
• finding fundamental error based on improper comments regarding defendant's use of the insanity defense in both opening statement and closing argument despite objections only to opening remarks
• improper prosecutorial misconduct warrants new trial where prosecutor indulges in personal attacks upon accused, his defense, or his counsel
• new trial required where prosecutor's disparagement of the insanity defense as a legal defense exceeded all acceptable bounds of advocacy

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).