Court of Appeals of Washington· 12/8/2009

State v. Anderson

Citations

153 Wash. App. 417

How courts have described this case

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

holding that a prosecutor may properly argue that the State has \met and exceeded\ its burden of proof
holding that “[t]he prosecutor’s statements that a ‘reasonable doubt’ is one for which a reason exists were . . . not inaccurate,” and noting that “the trial court’s instructions to the jury only reiterated this concept”
holding that prosecutor’s comments were improper but not prejudicial
“The trial court’s instructions regarding the presumption of innocence minimized any negative impact on the jury”
“The trial court’s instructions regarding the presumption of innocence minimized any negative impact on the jury. Again, we presume the jury follows the trial court’s instructions.”
“We review a prosecuting attorney’s allegedly improper remarks in the context of the total argument, the issues in the case, the evidence addressed in the argument, and the instructions given to the jury.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Penoyar

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

32 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

17 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

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.