Legal Opinion

State v. Francis

Tennessee Supreme Court

Decided April 2, 1984PublishedCited by 60 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

DROWOTA, Justice.

In this appeal from a conviction of sexual battery, defendant contends, inter alia, that the State’s use of the missing witness inference during closing argument was prejudicial error. We granted defendant’s Rule 11 application for permission to appeal in order to determine whether the State’s comment on the failure of the defendant to call his six-year-old daughter as a witness was a proper subject matter of argument. We hold that the trial court erred in allowing the State to make this argument before the jury. We reverse the conviction and remand the case for a new…

2Cases cited28 opinions

  1. Kotteakos v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
  2. Graves v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
  3. Harrington v. StateTennessee Supreme Court · 1965
  4. Delk v. StateTennessee Supreme Court · 1979
  5. Cleveland Burgess v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1970

23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by60 opinions

  1. State v. EvansTennessee Supreme Court · 1992
  2. State v. MiddlebrooksTennessee Supreme Court · 1992
  3. State v. RodriguezTennessee Supreme Court · 2008
  4. State v. ThompsonTennessee Supreme Court · 1989
  5. Newcomb v. Kohler Co.Court of Appeals of Tennessee · 2006

55 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API