State v. Kingsley
Oregon Supreme Court
1Concurrence
I concur in all of the foregoing except the process of reasoning employed by my associates in reaching their conclusion that no reversible error was committed when the court permitted the district attorney to advance the challenged argument. I agree with the result reached by the majority, but do so by a different process of reasoning which does not subscribe to the doctrine that when the attorney for the defendant departs from the record the district attorney must stay within it; rather, I am of the opinion that the act of the defendant's attorney in going outside of the record, over the…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- People v. . FieldingNew York Court of Appeals · 1899
- Anderson v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1922
- Watts v. Spokane, P. & S. Ry. Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1918
- Pierson v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1886
- Boyd v. Portland Electric Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1900
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- State v. KingsleyOregon Supreme Court · 1931