Legal Opinion

State v. Frost

Washington Supreme Court

Decided June 28, 2007No. 77444-7PublishedCited by 48 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

¶ 1 The Sixth Amendment provides, in relevant part, “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right... to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.”1 This right to counsel encompasses the delivery of closing argument.2 Although trial courts possess discretion over the scope of closing argument, a limitation that goes too far may infringe upon a defendant’s Sixth Amendment right to counsel. When a court’s limitation of argument relates to a fact necessary to support a conviction, the defendant’s due process rights may also be implicated. Such constitutional infringements…

2Cases cited34 opinions

  1. In Re WINSHIPSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
  2. Arizona v. FulminanteSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  3. Neder v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
  4. Sullivan v. LouisianaSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
  5. United States v. Gonzalez-LopezSupreme Court of the United States · 2006

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

3Cited by48 opinions

  1. State v. MontgomeryWashington Supreme Court · 2008
  2. State v. MontgomeryWashington Supreme Court · 2008
  3. Glebe v. FrostSupreme Court of the United States · 2014
  4. State v. FryWashington Supreme Court · 2010
  5. State v. FryWashington Supreme Court · 2010

43 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