Legal Opinion
State v. Monroe
Court of Appeals of Washington
Decided July 30, 2001No. 46044-7-IPublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
27 P.3d 1249 (2001)
STATE of Washington, Respondent,
v.
Antonial Marquett MONROE, Appellant.
No. 46044-7-I.
Court of Appeals of Washington, Division 1.
July 30, 2001.
Eric Nielsen, Nielsen Browman & Assoc., PLLC, Seattle, for appellant.
Constance Crawley, Everett, WA, for respondent.
GROSSE, J.
A trial court has discretion to permit a jury to review witness testimony during its deliberations. However, that discretion is circumscribed by the concern that such a review does not unduly emphasize any portion of the testimony. Thus, in exercising discretion, the trial court must take into account the danger…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- United States v. James Robert HernandezCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1994
- State v. CastellanosWashington Supreme Court · 1997
- State v. CastellanosWashington Supreme Court · 1997
- State v. HarrisMontana Supreme Court · 1991
- Chambers v. StateWyoming Supreme Court · 1986
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- State v. MorgensenCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2008
- State v. MorgensenCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2008
- Fuller v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2005
- People v. DeBellaColorado Court of Appeals · 2009