Appellate Review of Comments During Closing Arguments and Standards of Review
|
| When a defendant appeals his conviction on the basis that the trial court erred in overruling his objection to the prosecutor's improper comments made during closing arguments, the appellate court will analyze the entire closing argument. The trial court is given wide discretion with respect to closing arguments. The appellate court is not quick to overturn the defendant's conviction simply on the basis of an improper remark made by the prosecutor. The test to determine whether the prosecutor's comments were so flagrant as to justify setting aside the defendant's conviction is whether the comments affected the verdict or the outcome of the case. If the prosecutor's comments affected the verdict, then the appellate court may set aside the verdict. If the appellate court sets aside the verdict it will probably remand for a new trial.
Constitutional Errors
Constitutional errors are among the most common errors cited by a defendant when appealing his conviction on the basis of the prosecutor's improper comments. A constitutional error may occur if the prosecutor makes a statement regarding the defendant's failure to testify. If the prosecutor's comments involved a violation of a right created by the federal constitution, the appellate court is required to review the error and reverse the defendant's conviction accordingly. The harmless error standard is not the proper standard for the appellate court to use when reviewing constitutional errors.
Curative Instruction
The appellate court must determine whether the curative instruction, if given, was sufficient to cure the taint of the prosecutor's improper comments. If the trial judge decided to give a curative instruction and the defendant failed to object to the instruction, in most cases, the defendant thereby waives his right to raise the issue of the prosecutor's improper comments at a later time.
Collateral Relief for Errors Committed During Closing Arguments
If the defendant claims that his conviction was improper on the basis of the prosecutor's improper comments, he may be entitled to habeas corpus relief. The defendant may be entitled to habeas corpus relief on the basis that the prosecutor's conduct infringed a specific guarantee of the Bill of Rights or because the prosecutor's remarks infected the trial with unfairness resulting in a violation of the defendant's due process rights. Copyright 2010 LexisNexis, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. |