Is there any case law in which a prosecutor has been found to have gone beyond the facts in their argument to the jury in a sexual assault case?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Ashmus, 2 Cal.Rptr.2d 112, 54 Cal.3d 932, 820 P.2d 214 (Cal. 1991):
By contrast, the question is somewhat closer so far as California law is concerned. It is settled that "a prosecutor may not go beyond the [54 Cal.3d 990] evidence in his argument to the jury." (People v. Benson, supra, 52 Cal.3d at p. 794, 276 Cal.Rptr. 827, 802 P.2d 330.) The prosecutor here seems to have done so. It is certainly conceivable that a reasonable juror could have understood the comments as stating or implying--incorrectly--that there was evidence in the record supporting the mentioned instances of sexual activity on defendant's part.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
