role defense in Washington

2026Edege-Nissen, 93 Wn.2d at 141 . 4 See Canon Rule 2.11(A): “A judge shall self-disqualify in any proceeding in which the judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned.” 17 No. 59684-9-II Upon the resting of the State’s case in chief, the trial court, on its own accord, excused the jury and then questioned the State about its presentation of the case, stating that it was confused why the State was relying only on Schwalb’s testimony.

2015Disparagement of Defense Counsel Le contends that the prosecutor committed misconduct by disparaging the role of defense counsel in closing argument by comparing the defense theory to "Alice's rabbit hole" and describing it as "a conspiracy" and outside the "realm of reasonable thought."14 To establish prosecutorial misconduct, the defendant "bears the burden of establishing the impropriety of the prosecuting attorney's comments and their prejudicial effect." State v. Brown, 132 Wn.2d 529, 561 , 940 P.2d 546 (1997).

2015Disparagement of Defense Counsel Le contends that the prosecutor committed misconduct by disparaging the role of defense counsel in closing argument by comparing the defense theory to "Alice's rabbit hole" and describing it as "a conspiracy" and outside the "realm of reasonable thought."14 To establish prosecutorial misconduct, the defendant "bears the burden of establishing the impropriety of the prosecuting attorney's comments and their prejudicial effect." State v. Brown, 132 Wn.2d 529, 561 , 940 P.2d 546 (1997).

2015State v. Gonzales, 111 Wn.

2013Generally, arguments first raised in a reply are not addressed.50 For this reason, we do not address this argument. 47 jd, at 1088. 48 id, at 1088-89. 49 See, e.g., Thorqerson, 172 Wn.2d at 450 (explaining that a prosecutor impugned defense counsel's integrity when the prosecutor "accused the defense of engaging in 'sl[e]ight of hand' tactics and used disparaging terms like 'bogus' and 'desperation' to describe the defense") (alteration in original); State v. Warren, 165 Wn.2d 17, 29 , 195 P.3d 940 (2008) (explaining that a prosecutor disparaged the role of defense counsel when the prosecutor

2013Generally, arguments first raised in a reply are not addressed.50 For this reason, we do not address this argument. 47 jd, at 1088. 48 id, at 1088-89. 49 See, e.g., Thorqerson, 172 Wn.2d at 450 (explaining that a prosecutor impugned defense counsel's integrity when the prosecutor "accused the defense of engaging in 'sl[e]ight of hand' tactics and used disparaging terms like 'bogus' and 'desperation' to describe the defense") (alteration in original); State v. Warren, 165 Wn.2d 17, 29 , 195 P.3d 940 (2008) (explaining that a prosecutor disparaged the role of defense counsel when the prosecutor

2013Generally, arguments first raised in a reply are not addressed.50 For this reason, we do not address this argument. 47 jd, at 1088. 48 id, at 1088-89. 49 See, e.g., Thorqerson, 172 Wn.2d at 450 (explaining that a prosecutor impugned defense counsel's integrity when the prosecutor "accused the defense of engaging in 'sl[e]ight of hand' tactics and used disparaging terms like 'bogus' and 'desperation' to describe the defense") (alteration in original); State v. Warren, 165 Wn.2d 17, 29 , 195 P.3d 940 (2008) (explaining that a prosecutor disparaged the role of defense counsel when the prosecutor

2013Generally, arguments first raised in a reply are not addressed.50 For this reason, we do not address this argument. 47 jd, at 1088. 48 id, at 1088-89. 49 See, e.g., Thorqerson, 172 Wn.2d at 450 (explaining that a prosecutor impugned defense counsel's integrity when the prosecutor "accused the defense of engaging in 'sl[e]ight of hand' tactics and used disparaging terms like 'bogus' and 'desperation' to describe the defense") (alteration in original); State v. Warren, 165 Wn.2d 17, 29 , 195 P.3d 940 (2008) (explaining that a prosecutor disparaged the role of defense counsel when the prosecutor

2013We assume without deciding that some ofthe statements were improper, but we disagree that Mack was prejudiced. 39 Report of Proceedings (Nov. 2, 2011) at 1053. 40 Emery, 174 Wn.2d at 762 . 41 Appellant's Reply Brief at 14. 11 No. 70347-1-1/12 "It is improper for the prosecutor to disparagingly comment on defense counsel's role or impugn the defense lawyer's integrity."42 But, in general, prosecutors are afforded wide latitude in making arguments to the jury and are allowed to draw reasonable inferences from the evidence.43 Further, they are entitled to make a fair response to the arguments ofd

1981Briefly stated, the doctrine is based on the premise that "[a] mother's care and influence is regarded as particularly important for children of tender age ..." Horen v. Horen, 73 Wn.2d 455, 460 , 438 P.2d 857 (1968).

1981Briefly stated, the doctrine is based on the premise that "[a] mother's care and influence is regarded as particularly important for children of tender age ..." Horen v. Horen, 73 Wn.2d 455, 460 , 438 P.2d 857 (1968).