Veteto v. State

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 State was persistent and flagrant by inquiring into post-arrest silence on three occasions
• concluding that because evidence of defendant’s guilt was not overwhelming, the inference to his silence could have been considered by the jury as evidence of his guilt
• concluding that the State was persistent and flagrant by inquiring into post-arrest silence on three occasions
• concluding that the State was persistent and flagrant by inquiring into post-arrest silence on three occasions
• holding that it was an improper comment on the evidence for the trial court to fail to use the word “alleged” when referring to the “victim”
• concluding that because evidence of defendant’s guilt was not overwhelming, the inference to his silence could have been considered by the jury as evidence of his guilt

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).