July 17, 2026 Commentary on Recent Cases of Interest

The division modified its prior opinion. You may recall that the majority reversed Simms’ felony menacing conviction because the judge failed to correctly answer the jury’s question, “Can a fist be considered a bludgeon?” by explaining that a fist cannot be considered a bludgeon. In the modified opinion, the majority adds: “On remand, the prosecution may either accept the menacing conviction as a misdemeanor or pursue a new trial on the charge as a felony.”

The trial court reversibly erred by denying Garcia’s motion for a mistrial after the jury heard a highly prejudicial statement that was mistakenly not redacted from the video of Garcia’s interrogation.

Correctional officers testified as lay witnesses about the techniques they employed to force Phillips to undergo a noncompliant strip-search. The topics included matters for expert testimony, and the trial court erred by admitting their testimony under the guise of lay opinion. Because defense counsel did not object, reversal was not required under the plain error standard since the error was neither obvious nor substantial.

The trial court erred by allowing the officer to testify to what eluding means. The error, however, was harmless.