Cited by

(stating that vouching occurs “when the government implies a guarantee of a witness’ s truthfulness, refers to facts outside the record, or expresses a personal opinion as to a witness’s credibility”).

Vouching occurs “when the government implies a guarantee of a witness’s truthfulness, refers to facts outside the record, or expresses a personal opinion as to a witness’s credibility.” (quotation omitted).

gues that the prosecutor belittled his chosen defense, deviating from the rule that the prosecutor must not “denigrate a particular type of defense, either explicitly or in the abstract.” Vouching occurs “when the government implies a guarantee of a witness’s truthfulness, refers to facts outside the record, or expresses a personal opinion as to a witness’s credibility.” -98 (Minn. 1998) (quoting United States v. Beasley, 102 F.3d 1440, 1449 (8th Cir. 1996)).

But here, Rock does not show error as the statements he points to do not “impl[y] a guarantee of a witness’s truthfulness, refer[] to facts outside the record, or express[] a personal opinion as to a witness’s credibility.”

“[ V]ouching occurs when the government implies a guarantee of a witness’ s truthfulness, refers to facts outside the record, or 9 expresses a personal opinion as to a witness’s credibility.” d 494, 497 (Minn. 1998) (quotation omitted).

-98 (Minn. 1998); (stating that a prosecutor commits misconduct when they “personally endorse the credibility of witnesses”).

or expresses a personal opinion as to a witness’s credibility.’” d 131, 139 (Minn. App. 2012) (), rev. denied (Minn. Mar.

He said, she seemed—he believed her.” Vouching occurs when “the [prosecuto r] implies a guarantee of a witness’s truthfulness, refers to facts outside the reco rd, or expresses a personal opinion as to a witness’s credibility.” State v. Patterson , (quotation omitted).

(citing United States v. Tate , 915 F.2d 400, 401 (8th Cir. 1990)).

or expresses a personal opinion as to a witness’s credibility.” (quotation omitted).

State v. Patterson , (quo tation omitted).

But it is error to guarantee a witness’s truthfulness or express a “personal opinion as to a witness’s credibility.” d 494, 497 (Minn. 1998) (quotation omitted).

( vouching occurs when state refers to facts outside record when arguing for witness credibility).

expresses a personal opinion as to a witness’s credibility.” (quotation omitted); (finding prosecutorial misconduct when prosecutor referred to a defense witness named “Lyra” as aptly named).

” (d 494, 497 (Minn. 1998)).

Vouching occurs “when the government implies a guarantee of a witness’s truthfulness, refers to facts outside the reco rd, or expresses a personal opinion as to a witness’s credibility.” (quotation omitted).

But vouching occurs when a prosecutor “implies a guarantee of a witness’s truthfulness, refers to facts outside the record, or expresses a personal opinion as to a witness’s credibility.”

Vouching occurs “when the government implies a guarantee of a witness’s truthfulness, refers to facts outside the record, or expresses a personal opinion as to a witness’s credibility.” (quotation omitted).

A prosecutor commits misconduct if he or she “implies a guarantee of a witness’s truthfulness, refers to facts outside the record, or expresses a personal opinion as to a witness’s credibility.” (quotation omitted).

But, during closing arguments, a prosecutor may properly present arguments about why particular witnesses should be perceived as credible or incredible so long as he 14 does not “impl[y] a guarantee of a witness’s truthfulness, refer[] to facts outside the record, or express[] a personal opinion as to a witness’s credibility.” (quotation omitted).

A prosecutor’s statements in closing argument become improper vouching when the prosecutor “implies a guarantee of a witness’s truthfulness, refers to facts outside the record, or expresses a personal opinion as to a witness’s credibility.” (quotation omitted).

Prosecu-torial misconduct occurs “when the [prosecutor] implies a guarantee of a witness’s truthfulness, refers to facts outside the record, or expresses a personal opinion as to a witness’s credibility.” (quoting United States v. Beasley, 102 F.3d 1440, 1449 (8th Cir.1996)).

Prosecu-torial misconduct occurs “when the [prosecutor] implies a guarantee of a witness’s truthfulness, refers to facts outside the record, or expresses a personal opinion as to a witness’s credibility.” (quoting United States v. Beasley, 102 F.3d 1440, 1449 (8th Cir.1996)).

“[V]ouching occurs when the government implies a guarantee of a witness’s truthfulness, refers to facts outside the record, or expresses a personal opinion as to a witness’s credibility.” (quotation omitted).

Vouching occurs “when the government implies a guarantee of a witness’s truthfulness, refers to facts outside the record, or expresses a personal opinion as to a witness’s credibility.” (quoting United States v. Beasley, 102 F.3d 1440, 1449 (8th Cir.1996)).

As for vouching, that occurs “ “when the government implies a guarantee of a witness’s truthfulness, refers to facts outside the record, or expresses a personal opinion as to a witness’s credibility.’ ” (quoting United States v. Beasley, 102 F.3d 1440, 1449 (8th Cir.1996)).

Finally, specifically in response to a similar claim of vouching, that evidence of the terms of a *326 witness’ plea agreement does not constitute improper vouching when it includes a truth-ftdness provision, unless the state directly or by implication expresses an opinion as to the witness’ credibility.