Skip to main content

Splunge v. State

Citations

  • 641 N.E.2d 628
  • 1994 Ind. LEXIS 139
  • 1994 WL 580869

How courts have described this case

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

  • finding error harmless after considering intent of prosecutor, directness of reference, extensiveness of reference, and overwhelming nature of evidence
  • finding error harmless after considering intent of prosecutor, directness of reference, extensiveness of reference, and overwhelming nature of evidence
  • finding error harmless after considering intent of prosecutor, directness of reference, extensiveness of reference, and overwhelming nature of evidence
  • where our supreme court found it improper for prosecutor to observe “that the defense counsel does not want the jury to know the truth”
  • the Supreme Court condemned the prosecutor’s attempt to remind the jury that the defendant did not testify, but nevertheless affirmed because of the overwhelming evidence of guilt

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Givan, Shepard, Dickson, Sullivan, Debruler

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

12 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

30 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.