v. Bobian (2019)

People v. Bobian, 2019 COA 183, ¶ 51 (Berger, J., specially concurring) (citing United States v. Cass, 127 F.3d 1218, 1223 (10th Cir. 1997)).

And while the 14 prosecutor here did not expressly use the word “lie,” we discern no meaningful distinction between the words “lie” and “blatantly false.” See Crider v. People, 186 P.3d 39, 41 (Colo. 2008) (“[I]t is improper for a lawyer to use any form of the word ‘lie’ in characterizing for a jury a witness’s testimony or his truthfulness.”); see also People v. Bobian, 2019 COA 183, ¶ 32 (prosecutors may not “express a personal opinion on the truth or falsity of witness te…

However, he urges us to depart from West because another division of this court more recently concluded that its “reasoning . . . is at odds with Colorado Supreme Court precedent. ” People v. Daley , 2021 COA 85, ¶ 90 (declining to apply West ) ; see also People v. Bobian , 2019 COA 183 , ¶¶ 43 -49 (Berge r, J., specially concurring) (expressing disagreement with West ). 32 ¶ 73 We needn’t weigh in on the propriety of West , though, because we conclude that any error in allo…

See People v. Bobian, 2019 COA 183, ¶¶ 45-49 (Berger, J., specially concurring) (collecting cases). ¶ 87 For example, the Kentucky Supreme Court has reasoned that “testimony that the witness previously made statements that were consistent with her trial testimony” was improper because “the evidence is offered to prove that the declarant’s trial testimony is truthful.” Dickerson v. Commonwealth, 174 S.W.3d 451, 472 (Ky. 2005). ¶ 88 Similarly, the South Carolina Supreme Court …