Chapter 17 - § 17.8 • THE "GOLDEN RULE" ARGUMENT

• Jurisdiction: Colorado

§ 17.8 • THE "GOLDEN RULE" ARGUMENT

Colorado

➢ "Golden Rule" Argument Is Improper in a Civil Case and Improper in Criminal Cases in Contexts Other Than Capital Sentencing. Asking the jury to imagine themselves in the place of the victim is improper. People v. Rodriguez, 794 P.2d 965, 973 (Colo. 1990).

➢ Considering Societal Impact of a Verdict Is Not Necessarily Improper. An argument couched in terms of harm to the community of which the jurors are members may be permitted under certain circumstances. A jury may consider harm to nonparties as a factor in assessing reprehensibility with respect to willful and wanton conduct. Qwest Servs. Corp. v. Blood, 252 P.3d 1071 (Colo. 2011).

Federal

➢ The "Golden Rule" Argument Is Improper in a Civil Case. The Golden Rule argument is improper but is not plain error and will not require reversal in the absence of an objection, particularly

...