United States v. Joseph Smith

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the prosecutor’s statement that the witness and defendant had “concocted” their story was proper because it suggested inferences that the jury could draw from the conflicting evidence
• holding that the prosecutor’s statement that the witness and defendant had “concocted” their story was proper because it -16- suggested inferences that the jury could draw from the conflicting evidence
• finding that a new trial was not warranted after the prosecutor’s improper statements because the evidence against the defendant was uncontested
• finding that a new trial was not warranted after the prosecutor's improper statements because the evidence against the defendant was -21- uncontested
• explaining that \inferences the jury might draw from the evidence\ are \a proper subject of comment by the prosecutor\ in closing arguments
• comment that witness and defendant had \concocted\ their story proper as it suggested inferences jury could draw from conflicting evidence

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).