Opinion ID: 1396611
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Preservation of Wicks Argument

Text: The threshold issue is whether appellant has even presented a Wicks argument to this court. [2] Appellant does not cite Wicks in either his initial brief or his reply brief; rather, it is the State's brief that expressly mentions and addresses the third Wicks exception. In framing this point on appeal, appellant contends the prosecutor's comments to the potential jurors during voir dire constituted such a serious error that the circuit court should have intervened and admonished the jury as to a correct statement of the law. Without specifically citing Wicks , appellant has effectively made the argument identified by this court as the third Wicks exceptionthe error is so flagrant and so highly prejudicial as to make it the duty of the court on its own motion to have the jury instructed correctly. Thus, the issue of a possible Wicks exception has been presented to this court in the instant appeal. Having concluded that the applicability of the third Wicks exception is properly before us, the question becomes whether there was a violation so fundamental as to require reversal.