What is the test for making an objection to a prosecutor's closing argument in a criminal case?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Petelo, A138954 (Cal. App. 2015):
To preserve a prosecutorial misconduct claim for review on appeal, "a defendant must make a timely objection and, unless an admonition would not have cured the harm, ask the trial court to admonish the jury to disregard the prosecutor's improper remarks or conduct." (People v. Martinez (2010) 47 Cal.4th 911, 956.) Appellant acknowledges he did not object to any portion of the remarks he now challenges (or indeed, to any portion of the prosecutor's closing argument), but he argues he was excused from doing so under the circumstances.
An exception to the objection requirement may occur "when the 'misconduct [is] pervasive, defense counsel [has] repeatedly but vainly objected to try to curb the misconduct, and the courtroom atmosphere was so poisonous that further objections would have been futile.' " (People v. Friend (2009) 47 Cal.4th 1, 29.) "In addition, failure to request the jury be admonished does not forfeit the issue for appeal if ' "an admonition would not have cured the harm caused by the misconduct." ' " (People v. Hill (1998) 17 Cal.4th 800, 820.) Neither exception applies in this case. Timely and appropriate objections could have cured any improprieties, and, had an objection been sustained on the grounds now urged by appellant, we presume the prosecutor would not
Page 10
"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.
