State v. Fiallo-Lopez

How courts have described this case

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

• prosecutor’s argument was improper because “no one other than Fiallo-Lopez himself could have offered the explanation the State demanded”
• prosecutor committed misconduct by drawing adverse inferences about defendant's Fifth Amendment rights by stating defendant did not rebut the State's evidence
• statements impermissible because \no one other than [the defendant] could have offered the explanation the State demanded.\
• prosecutor improperly commented on the defendant's silence when the prosecutor argued that defendant did not attempt to rebut the prosecution's evidence
• a constitutional error is harmless if the appellate court is convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that any reasonable jury would have reached the same result in the absence of the error
• a prosecutor may comment on witness veracity if he or she does not express a personal opinion and does not make the comment to incite the passion of the jury

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).