California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Batchelor, 178 Cal.Rptr.3d 28, 229 Cal.App.4th 1102 (Cal. App. 2014):
5 Because defendant did not object below that the statement was improper, we do not consider whether the argument crossed the boundary of prosecutorial misconduct. (See People v. Parson (2008) 44 Cal.4th 332, 359, 79 Cal.Rptr.3d 269, 187 P.3d 1 [to preserve a claim of misconduct, a defendant must make a timely objection and request an admonition].)
5 Because defendant did not object below that the statement was improper, we do not consider whether the argument crossed the boundary of prosecutorial misconduct. (See People v. Parson (2008) 44 Cal.4th 332, 359, 79 Cal.Rptr.3d 269, 187 P.3d 1 [to preserve a claim of misconduct, a defendant must make a timely objection and request an admonition].)
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.