In this case, the Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction of Class A child molesting, rejecting the defendant’s argument that the prosecutor’s closing argument constituted fundamental error and that the victim’s testimony was incredibly dubious and therefore insufficient to sustain his conviction.
In closing argument, the prosecutor alluded to the fact that the defendant did not testify. The defendant’s trial counsel did not object to the statements. Therefore, to warrant a reversal, the comments had to amount to fundamental error, which occurs when misconduct makes a fair trial impossible or when misconduct blatantly violates due process and presents substantial potential for harm. The Court examined several cases involving fundamental error analysis of a prosecutor’s comment on a defendant’s failure to testify and concluded that the prosecutor’s comments in this case did not amount to fundamental error.
This case brings up a tricky tactical decision that trial counsel must make. On the one hand, objecting to a statement in closing argument preserves the issue for appeal. On the other, objecting brings attention to the statement. Therefore, it is often in a party’s interest not to object to a statement and hope the jury pays it little heed. No blanket answer exists as to whether objecting or remaining silent is the best tactical decision.
The Court of Appeals then rejected the defendants’ sufficiency of the evidence argument. Arguing on appeal that evidence at trial was incredibly dubious is rarely successful. Although it is probably worth making the argument when a defendant was convicted based on the testimony of a single witness, the argument basically asks the Court of Appeals to second-guess a jury’s credibility determination.
The information contained in the Barrett McNagny LLP website is for informational purposes only and should not be considered legal advice on any subject matter. Furthermore, the information contained on our website may not reflect the most current legal developments. You should not act upon this information without consulting legal counsel.
Your transmission and receipt of information on the Barrett McNagny LLP website, or sending an e-mail to one of our attorneys or staff, will not create an attorney-client relationship between you and Barrett McNagny LLP. If you need legal advice and want to establish an attorney-client relationship with Barrett McNagny LLP, please contact one of our attorneys by telephone, email, or other means of communication, and allow the attorney to confirm that the firm does not represent other persons or entities involved in the matter and that the firm is willing to accept representation. Until such confirmation is provided by one of our attorneys, you should not transmit information to us that you consider confidential. If you do provide information to us, and no attorney-client relationship is established, the information will not be considered confidential or privileged, and our receipt of such information will not preclude us from representing another client in a matter adverse to you.
Any links to other websites are not intended to be referrals or endorsements of those sites.
An attorney-client relationship will NOT be formed merely by sending an email to Barrett McNagny, LLP or to any of its attorneys. Please do not send any information specific to your legal needs until you obtain approval from a Barrett McNagny, LLP attorney, as the content of such email will not be considered confidential or privileged. By sending us an email, you confirm your understanding of this notification. If you agree, you may use the e-mail links on this page to contact an attorney.