However, where the evidence is relevant to the witness' credibility under MRE 608 and MRE 609, such questions are proper. We find that defendant's use of an alias at the time of his arrest was relevant to his credibility. Therefore, the prosecutor's questions were not improper. Defendant next argues that the prosecutor's closing argument shifted the burden of proof. We have examined the allegedly improper comments and find them to be nothing more than a reasonable inference based on the evidence presented at trial, which is proper.
Defendant also argues that the prosecutor improperly appealed to the sympathy of the jury.
A prosecutor's comments must be considered in light of defense arguments. In this case, the prosecutor was not appealing to the jury for sympathy, but was responding to defense counsel's argument that a witness who cried on the stand was not sincere. We find no error. Next, defendant argues that the cumulative effect of the misconduct deprived him of a fair trial, even if no single instance did so. This argument fails, however, because the only incident that was improper was the prosecutor's request that defendant comment on the credibility of prosecution witnesses.