P. v. Acquah CA3
In this variant of what has come to be known as road rage, the victims and defendant told the jury very different accounts of what transpired on the night of June 29, 2015. The jury was confronted with a classic credibility contest; either the victims or defendant lied when testifying at trial. Defendant Kenneth Allan Acquah III contends the judgment finding him guilty of two counts of assault with a deadly weapon must be reversed because the prosecutor’s rebuttal argument improperly diluted the prosecution’s burden of proof by misrepresenting the meaning of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. We disagree and affirm.
Comments on P. v. Acquah CA3