Legal Opinion · Dissent
Commonwealth v. Wiggins
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Decided November 14, 1974No. Appeal, 1429Published
1Dissent
Dissenting Opinion by
Spaeth, J.:
I believe that the district attorney’s characterization of appellant as a “dangerous man” in closing argument was sufficiently prejudicial (and unprofessional) to warrant the granting of a new trial.
The limits of permissible argument by a prosecutor to a jury are set forth in ABA Standards, The Prosecution Function §5.8 at 126:
“(a) The prosecutor may argue all reasonable inferences from evidence in the record. It is unprofessional conduct for the prosecutor intentionally to misstate the evidence or mislead the jury as to the inferences it may draw.
“(b) It is…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Commonwealth v. WableSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1955
- Commonwealth v. LipscombSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1974
- Commonwealth v. MartinolichSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1974
- Commonwealth v. RussellSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1974
- Commonwealth v. CapallaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.