Legal Opinion
Murray v. United States
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided August 12, 2004No. 02-CF-52, 02-CF-194, 02-CF-391PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
FARRELL, Associate Judge:
Appellants were each found guilty by a jury of kidnapping while armed, possession of a firearm during a crime of violence, and carrying a pistol without a license. 1 Their principal claim on appeal is that the prosecutor engaged in improper and inflammatory bolstering of the credibility of government witnesses by asserting in his closing argument that the witnesses’ reluctance to testify stemmed from their fear of appellants. We agree that, although a portion of this argument was supported by evidence before the jury, the prosecutor exceeded the bounds of proper…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- United States v. OlanoSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Kotteakos v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Johnson v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1996
- Harris v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1992
- Mercer v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1999
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Appleton v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2009
- Blunt v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2008
- Johnson v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2009
- Simpson v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2005
- Azariah Israel & Ronald Marquet Cheadle v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2014
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.