State v. Brunnemer
Court of Appeals of Oregon
1Opinion of the CourtGarrett, P. J.
Defendant appeals judgments of conviction for multiple domestic-violence offenses. He assigns error to the trial court’s failure to sustain defense objections or grant a mistrial in response to the state’s closing argument, in which the prosecutor made comments critical of defense counsel and asserted that the defense was “not asking for justice.” We conclude that the prosecutor’s statements crossed the boundary of permissible argument and prejudiced defendant’s right to a fair trial. Accordingly, we conclude that the trial court abused its discretion, and we reverse and remand the judgments.1
2Cases cited9 opinions
- State v. DavisOregon Supreme Court · 2003
- State v. WorthCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2009
- State v. SmithCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1970
- State v. LundbomCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1989
- State v. SeegerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1971
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- State v. PierpointCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2023
- State v. MunizCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2024
- State v. WellingtonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2024
- State v. PutnamCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2025
- State v. RobertsCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2025
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.