CASE LAW UPDATE: Whether the prosecutor’s closing arguments were proper in light of defense counsel’s statements
Defendant was convicted of 3rd degree felony assault. He had engaged in a fight in prison. Defendant appealed. Defendant argued that the prosecutor’s closing remarks during rebuttal were unduly prejudicial. The Minnesota Court of Appeals held that the prosecutor’s comments did not constitute plain error when he argued that the laws had to apply in the prison in order to protect everyone, when given after defense counsel’s argument that prison is a “dangerous place” and a “fight club.” Affirmed.
State v. Fisherman, A19-1506, Chisago County.
Minnesota Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson was not attorney of record in this case.