State v. Cardus

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that the jury is presumed to follow the court's instruction to disregard certain testimony
• concluding that the prosecutor’s statement during rebuttal argument “urg[ing] the jury to, in effect, ignore the jury instructions and follow their ‘common sense’” “was improper” and “constituted prosecutorial misconduct”
• concluding that an inmate cannot consent to sexual penetration by a prison guard, in part, because the statute criminalizing sexual 26 penetration between inmates and guards sought to prevent such consent by the inmate
• \It is presumed that the jury follows the court's instructions. \

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).