Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Frazier (D) and Rawls were jointly indicted for the murder of Marleau. Rawls made a confession which implicated D in the killing. Rawls plead guilty and had not yet been sentenced when D's trial took place. During opening statements, the prosecutor stated in considerable detail the evidence he intended to present including what Rawls was going to say. The prosecutor did not state that Rawls had confessed. When the prosecutor finished, D moved for a mistrial. That motion was denied. When Rawls was called to the stand he invoked his self-incrimination rights and refused to answer. D again moved for a mistrial. D was convicted and applied for habeas corpus, and it was granted by the district court. The district court granted it based on the prosecuting attorney's recital of evidence before the jury without an opportunity to cross-examine.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.