ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Ethics Blogs -> Legal Ethics Forum

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Ethics

: Legal Ethics Forum

Using the closing argument to fight the in limines and to suggest what had been excluded

ADVERTISEMENTS
In  STATE v. CIFUENTES-VICENTE, the Court of Appeals of Washington upheld two $250 sanctions against criminal defense counsel for suggesting to the jury what they might have heard if the judge hadn't excluded certain lines of questioning and for speaking objections.  The opinion has extended transcripts of what counsel said, so the case might be useful for discussing the ethics of trial rhetoric.  ("[Counsel] said [to the jury] that she was unable to bring out motivations of the accusers 'because of the rules of this court.'") 

Full post as published by Legal Ethics Forum on August 26, 2010 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0033 secs (from cache 11/04/26 10:28:04)