Legal Opinion

State v. Blair

Washington Supreme Court

Decided September 19, 1991No. 57669-6PublishedCited by 97 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBrachtenbach, J.

Defendant Daniel R. Blair challenges his conviction for unlawful delivery of a controlled substance, arguing that the prosecutor committed reversible error by commenting, during closing argument, on defendant's failure to call particular witnesses. The Court of Appeals agreed that error occurred, but held that reversal was not required because defendant did not object and the comments were not so flagrant and ill intentioned that a curative instruction would not have neutralized their effect. State v. Blair, noted at 58 Wn. App. 1068 (1990). We conclude the prosecutor's comments did not…

2Cases cited34 opinions

  1. In Re WINSHIPSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
  2. Graves v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
  3. Commonwealth v. DomanskiMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1954
  4. State v. CaronSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1974
  5. State v. DavisWashington Supreme Court · 1968

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

3Cited by97 opinions

  1. State v. RussellWashington Supreme Court · 1994
  2. State v. GentryWashington Supreme Court · 1995
  3. State v. O'HaraWashington Supreme Court · 2009
  4. State v. GregoryWashington Supreme Court · 2006
  5. State v. Fernandez-MedinaWashington Supreme Court · 2000

92 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