Woodard v. United States
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
FARRELL, Senior Judge:
A partly reconstituted division of the court granted rehearing in this case to reconsider our previous holding that the prosecutor’s closing argument did not foster a misleading impression by the jury, sufficient to warrant reversal, of the credibility of an important government witness. See Woodard v. United States, 1 A.3d 371, 376 (D.C.2010). We now hold that the argument in question might well have improperly bolstered the witness’s credibility in jurors’ minds, and that because the trial judge declined to adopt a corrective measure reasonably proposed by the defense,…
Also in this document: Per curiam.
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Kotteakos v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Darden v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Donnelly v. DeChristoforoSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Smith v. PhillipsSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- United States v. Chake G. Kojayan, United States of America v. Hratch Meguerdity KalfayanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1993
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Brian K. Gilliam, John A. Daniels, and Ronald L. English v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2013
- CHARLES M. COATES v. UNITED STATESDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2015
- Freeman v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2013