State v. Soto-Fong

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that the jury, not a reviewing court, determines whether evidence is credible (citation omitted)
• noting that Woods testified that “the third murderer was ‘Martin,’ ‘the Mexican dude,’ who ‘used to work there[.]’”
• noting that Woods testified that “the third murderer was ‘Martin,’ ‘the Mexican dude,’ who ‘used to work there[.]’”
• stating that proof beyond a reasonable doubt of any one of the three components of the aggravating circumstance, cruelty, heinousness, or depravity, is sufficient to support a finding of the aggravating circumstance
• stating that proof beyond a reasonable doubt of any one of the three components of the aggravating circumstance, cruelty, heinousness, or depravity, is sufficient to support a finding of the aggravating circumstance
• determining that “once [Soto-Fong] made the tactical decision to introduce some of [the informant’s] testimony about [the conversation with the two alleged accomplices], he could not simultaneously preclude the state from introducing other evidence of that same conversation”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).