Opinion ID: 2445
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: Claim of Vouching During Prosecutor's Summation

Text: Rodriguez has submitted a pro se brief, contending that the Government improperly vouched for its witnesses in its rebuttal summation. In the absence of objection at trial, the claim is reviewed for plain error, see United States v. Zichettello, 208 F.3d 72, 103 (2d Cir.2000) (flagrant abuse must be shown). Throughout his summation, Reynoso's counsel repeatedly accused Government witnesses of lying. In rebuttal, the prosecutor responded with mild sarcasm: Three people that didn't know each other got their stories together and they came in here and they told a lie to all of you to punish these two men that none of them had ever met before, for what? What does Trooper Powell get a gold star on his uniform for coming in here? The man came in here. The prosecutor did not express a personal opinion about the credibility of the witnesses. She merely invited the jury to consider the implausibility of Reynoso's claim that the witnesses were all committing perjury. See United States v. Resto, 824 F.2d 210, 212 (2d Cir.1987) (finding that the remarks were permissible responses to contentions made by defense counsel in her summation).