State v. Pabst

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that the law recognizes a prosecutor must be allowed “the freedom to craft an argument drat includes reasonable inferences based on the evidence”
• holding it is improper for a prosecutor to refer to facts outside the evidence
• recognizing rules against a prosecutor’s improper comments on witness credibility in 2000
• considering trial court’s response to misconduct of prosecutor after objection by defendant
• noting the ultimate conclusion as to any witness’ veracity rests with the jury
• noting \the jury . . . might have decided Pabst was guilty because the prosecutor told it Pabst was lying\ and holding, because there was no overwhelming evidence, it required reversal

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).