The City Of Las Vegas v. Dist. Ct. (Nev. Crt, Llc)

How courts have described this case

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

• but for judge’s thorough instructions, prosecutor’s improper closing would have entitled defendant to new trial where evidence was “very strong” but “not overwhelming”
• improper remarks in closing not prejudicial when considered “in the context of the argument and the case as a whole”
• trial judge was in best position to evaluate all circumstances and actual prejudicial effect; accordingly, ruling was entitled to substantial deference
• “ ‘When a verdict is returned and before the verdict is recorded, the jury may be polled in the discretion of the judge.’ ” (Emphasis added.) (quoting Mass. R. Crim. P. 27(d) (eff. July 1, 1979))
• “He’s telling you the truth” not improper vouching
• appeal in case of codefendant, Jeffrey Hardy

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).