Court Opinion

ID: 9834418
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 23:34:19.78507+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:44:14.879982
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
In justice to appellee’s counsel, we state that the alleged error concerning the argument set out above was raised for the first time on motion for a new trial, and that no objection was made thereto during the trial.
The harmful effect of such an argument must be appraised in the light of the entire record. There is no legal yardstick for its precise measurement. Precedents are of little value, as cases differ so widely in their facts. Mere human opinions of this character are of course unsatisfactory, both to their author and to the losing party. Here we appraised the argument as having the probable effect of injury to appellant. Indeed, it seems more than probable. The circumstances point an accusing finger at appellee as the author of a fire, almost conclusively shown to be incendiary. Appellee needed an explanation badly. His counsel furnished it, in a very mild but highly effective way. Being a mere human opinion, we recognize that another might honestly arrive at a different conclusion upon the same facts. The issues in this case are too close for us to be able to say that an instruction from the court or its withdrawal by counsel would have removed from the jurors’ minds the effect of such an argument.
Motion overruled.