California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Coddington, 2 P.3d 1081, 23 Cal.4th 529, 97 Cal.Rptr.2d 528 (Cal. 2000):
No objection was made to any of the argument appellant now claims was improper.48 The rule, that failure to object or request an admonition to the jury, and thereby to afford the trial court the opportunity to cure the impact of misconduct by admonition to the jury, constitutes a waiver of an appellate claim of prejudicial misconduct, applies to a prosecutor's penalty phase argument. (People v. Samayoa, supra, 15 Cal.4th at p. 854, 64 Cal.Rptr.2d 400, 938 P.2d 2.) We have, nonetheless, reviewed the prosecutor's argument and conclude that it did not exceed proper bounds. It was tied to the evidence, related the evidence to the factors upon which the penalty decision should be based, and was not argument that would invite a verdict based on passion or prejudice.
5. Denying jury view of Life Without Possibility of Parole incarceration.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.