California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Williams, 16 Cal.4th 153, 66 Cal.Rptr.2d 123, 940 P.2d 710 (Cal. 1997):
Even assuming the prosecutor's remarks were improper, defendant suffered no prejudice from counsel's delay in objecting. The prosecutor stated to the jury that nothing he said was evidence, evidence came from the witnesses, and the jury was the judge of the facts. The trial court told the jury "not to consider personal opinions," and the prosecutor apologized. When defense counsel argued, he plainly stated: "Not only do we not agree that it is a first degree murder, we don't even agree that it is a second degree murder." Defense counsel found the court's corrective admonition "sufficient" and so do we. There is no reasonable probability the outcome would have been different had counsel assigned misconduct sooner. Hence, counsel was not ineffective. (See People v. Osband (1996) 13 Cal.4th 622, 700, 55 Cal.Rptr.2d 26, 919 P.2d 640.)
[16 Cal.4th 225] J. Guilt Phase Instructional Errors
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.