Does a prosecutor's reference to a defendant's case as "open and shut" constitute improper vouching?

Defendant contends that by referring to the case as "open and shut," the prosecutor engaged in improper vouching. "[I]t is misconduct for prosecutors to vouch for the strength of their cases by invoking their personal prestige, reputation, or depth of experience, or the prestige or reputation of their office, in support of it. [Citations.] Specifically, a prosecutor's reference to his or her own experience, comparing a defendant's case negatively to others the prosecutor knows about or has tried, is improper. [Citation.]" (People v. Huggins (2006) 38 Cal.4th 175, 206-207.)

In this case, the comments at issue did not constitute misconduct. The prosecutor did not imply that this case was "open and shut" as compared to other criminal cases that he had tried. In context, his comments reasonably would have been understood by the jury simply as "an invitation to draw the desired inference": that the prosecution had presented a strong case showing defendant's guilt. (Cf. People v. Johnson (1992) 3 Cal.4th 1183, 1226.) Because the prosecutor's remarks were not improper, defendant's trial counsel was not ineffective for failing to object.⁴

Page 28