Dave was extremely professional but more importantly I was treated as a person not a case. He always returned calls and emails in a very timely manner. I would definitely recommend Dave to help with legal needs! -Jennifer S.

As someone who never had a lawyer, David made everything as simple as possible. He is very easy to communicate with and provides all the answers and support you will ever need. If I ever need a lawyer again, David will be my first choice to contact. -Andrew

I was falsely accused of something and had an order filed against me. Ben represented me during court and successfully had the order dismissed. He also went above and beyond to make sure it would not show up on my record. – Brittany.

Home » Blog » Prosecutorial Misconduct

Prosecutorial Misconduct

Share

Case:  State of Tennessee v. Edward Walsh

Facts:  Defendant contends that the prosecutor made an improper statement in closing argument. Defendant did not make a contemporaneous objection at trial but did raise the issue in his motion for new trial.

Appellate Decision:  The intermediate court applied a plain error standard and concluded “no unequivocal rule of law” was breached, so Defendant was not entitled to relief.

Review Granted:  January 15, 2021. The Supreme Court’s order specified review was granted only to the question about “whether plenary or plain error review should apply to a claim of prosecutorial misconduct during closing argument when a contemporaneous objection is not lodged at the time the misconduct allegedly occurred, but the claim is raised in the motion for a new trial.”

Prediction:  Ben thinks the Supreme Court will rule against the Defendant and hold the more restrictive plain error review applies when a contemporaneous objection is not raised during a closing argument, since otherwise the trial court does not have an opportunity to remedy a potential error.