State v. Casella
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
1Dissent
RUDMAN, Justice,
with whom WATHEN, C.J. and CLIFFORD, J. join, dissenting.
I find the prosecutor’s closing argument in the present case, when read (1) in its entirety, (2) in the context of the nature of the charges against Casella, and (3) in light of the defense Casella presented, was fairly based on the evidence introduced at trial. I, therefore, respectfully dissent from the Court’s decision to vacate Casella’s five criminal convictions.
While I certainly agree with the Court that expressions of a prosecutor’s personal opinion on the credibility of a defendant made during a closing argument…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- State v. SmithSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1983
- State v. HindsSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1984
- State v. HarnishSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1989
- State v. SteenSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1993
- State v. BerkleySupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1989
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.