Abstract
Dean Carlson poses the question: When a prosecutor refers to evidence outside the record in his summation, has he thereby violated the accused person's constitutional right to cross-examine the witnesses against him? The prevailing view is that this is reversible error only if the defendant can prove that the reference was highly prejudicial.
After a full analysis of all the leading decisions--and these are largely analogous in nature--the author proposes a new rule and a new approach to this unexplored area.
Repository Citation
Ronald L. Carlson,
Argument to the Jury and the Constitutional Right of Confrontation
(1973),
Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.uga.edu/fac_artchop/529
Criminal Law Bulletin, Vol. 9, No. 4 (May 1973), pp. 293-309