Rowsey v. Breitman

Oral argument

• Argued

  43 min recording
  Listen

Source: CourtListener oral-argument corpus (CC0).

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that lawyer’s reference to informa- tion outside the evidentiary record was improper under OEC 103(3) and required reversal
• holding that lawyer’s reference to 586 State v. Banks information outside the evidentiary record was improper under OEC 103(3) and required reversal
• explaining that, in closing arguments to the jury, counsel have a large degree of freedom to comment on the evidence and urge the jury to draw legitimate inferences from the evidence
• explaining when an objection, rather than rebuttal argument, is the proper way to respond to a defense argument about missing evidence
• explaining that “in presenting closing arguments to the jury, counsel have a large degree of freedom to comment on the evidence submit- ted and urge the jury to draw any all legitimate inferences from that evidence” (internal quotation marks omitted)
• discussing ways that a party may permissibly obtain recourse against another party’s improper argument, not including “by remaining silent during the opponent’s closing argument, and then resorting to self-help by presenting argument based on facts not in evidence”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).