Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Litigation Blogs -> How Appealing

Litigation

: How Appealing

"Were this case simply about an innocent game of canasta, I would readily join the opinion of my majority colleagues outright."

"Were this case simply about an innocent game of canasta, I would readily join the opinion of my majority colleagues outright." So begins the dissenting opinion that Tenth Circuit Judge Carlos F. Lucero issued today. The dissent continues, "However, the abrupt departure of the trial judge from the bench while defense counsel was discussing the testimony of defendant's star witness, when coupled with the court's earlier admonitions to the jury that the same witness's testimony was 'absolutely untrue' and a 'falsity,' can only be interpreted as a clear message to the jury that the witness was not credible or worthy of the court and jury's unbiased consideration."

According to the majority opinion, the trial judge left the bench during defense counsel's closing argument in this federal criminal trial because it was "his secretary's afternoon to play canasta and he had to get a couple of letters out."

Full post as published by How Appealing on February 17, 2010 (boomark / email).