Court Opinion

ID: 9687743
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 16:45:53.857489+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:18:31.032413
License: Public Domain

JONES, Justice
(concurring in result).
I concur in the holding expressed in the majority opinion to the effect that counsel’s reference to Judas in his closing argument is protected by the “wide latitude of argument” rule; and, while I would not debate with my learned brothers on matters of theology or Biblical history, I must assert that nothing contained in the majority opinion can dissuade a lifetime of teaching and conviction that Judas Iscariot was in every sense a despicable, reprehensible character, and this despite all my Calvinistic (Hardshell) indoctrination of predestination. Under either version (be he the subject of damnation or one to be pitied), the propriety of counsel’s argument is sustainable under our liberal rules of advocacy, including the right to reply in kind.