Court of Appeals of Oregon· 7/31/2024

State v. Smith

Citations

334 Or. App. 89
554 P.3d 817

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 prosecutor’s “single misstatement” was “a straightforward and potentially easy-to-dispel misstate- ment * * *.”
concluding that a prosecutor’s “single misstate- ment” was a “straightforward and potentially easy-to-dispel misstatement” and had the defendant objected, “the trial court could have provided an instruction to the jury to dis- regard the prosecutor’s misstatement of the law”
determining that the prosecutor’s statements that misstated “a foundational principle of criminal law” were impermissible
denying plain-error review where the prosecutor’s improper statement did not call to mind “bias, emotions, or other improper bases for deciding the case”
considering the prosecutor’s remark in “the entire context of the prosecu- tor’s challenged statements” to determine if the remark was improper
a brief improper remark about “burden of persuasion,” in the con- text of a “lengthy” closing argument during which the pros- ecutor “referred multiple times to the state having the bur- den of proof,” did not necessitate reversal

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

12 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

4 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.