State v. Parris

Summary

The court held that repeated prosecutorial misstatements concerning the extreme emotional disturbance defense deprived the defendant of a fair trial because they distorted the required subjective and objective inquiries and were not adequately cured. It reversed the murder conviction and ordered a new trial on that charge, while upholding admission of the defendant’s unredacted police interview because the slurs were relevant to his emotional state and not unfairly prejudicial when accompanied by limiting instructions.