See State v. Kleypas, 272 Kan. 894, 1088, 40 P.3d 139 (2001) (even if instances of prosecutorial misconduct are harmless error in and of themselves, their cumulative effect must be analyzed), cert. Robinson's attempt to revive the issue is wholly unpersuasive. Mach is distinguishable. [u]nder the pre-Hall standard, an information is sufficient if it substantially follows the language of the statute or charges the offense in equivalent words or others of the same import, so long as the defendant is fully informed of the particular offense charged and the court is able to determine under what statute the charge is founded. State v. Reyna, 290 Kan. 666, Syl. Also, because K.S.A. 247 Kan. at 195 ([i]t is not necessary to establish that the need existed only that the request for assistance was made). Juror 23 later disclosed that he was an attorney and, therefore, understood the presumption of innocence and would acquit if the State failed to meet its burden. 223408 and K.S.A. Under a plain reading of our constitution, a punishment would be infirm if it is either cruel, or it is unusual. Nevertheless, in my view, the death penalty fits both and I would declare it unconstitutional in this state. He cried for himself. 213439(a)(6). This fact is important because Hensley recognized a legally significant distinction between a juror's personal resort to religious values and his or her decision to consult a minister for guidance in deciding the sentence. The process was lengthy but, in hindsight, proved highly effective in identifying and removing those rendered unqualified by their exposure to pretrial publicity. Moreover, while beyond the wide latitude afforded prosecutors in discussing the evidence, the comments were made in response to expert testimony concerning defendant's propensity toward violence in prison. Robinson said he was a wealthy businessman with a history of helping other professional women get established in the area. We will not declare a statute unconstitutional as applied unless it is clear beyond a reasonable doubt that the statute infringes on constitutionally protected rights. United States v. Gagliardi, 506 F.3d 140, 151 (2d Cir.2007) (standard minimal); Lexington Ins. However, a careful review of Outler, DeLuna, and other magistrate-as-former-prosecutor cases reveals the pivotal question is not whether there are any facts common between the two cases, but instead whether they arose from a common investigation or single transaction or event.
Ron Lyle Training Routine, Articles N