Does a defendant have a claim of prosecutorial misconduct on appeal because he did not object to or request that the jury be admonished?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Webb, A138547 (Cal. App. 2015):
Defendant did not object to the prosecutor's statements and did not request that the jury be admonished, and he has, therefore, forfeited these claims on appeal. (See People v. Alfaro, supra, 41 Cal.4th at p. 1328.) Attempting to avoid this result, defendant first
Page 17
contends the issue is preserved because he raised it in his motion for new trial. However, such argument was not itself timely.8 "It is well settled that making a timely and specific objection at trial, and requesting that the jury be admonished (if jury is not waived), is a necessary prerequisite to preserve a claim of prosecutorial misconduct for appeal. [Citations.] 'The primary purpose of the requirement that a defendant object at trial to argument constituting prosecutorial misconduct is to give the trial court an opportunity, through admonition of the jury, to correct any error and mitigate any prejudice.' [Citation.]" (People v. Seumanu (2015) 61 Cal.4th 1293, 1328, emphasis added.)
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
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.
