Opinion ID: 1855709
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 22

Heading: Highly emotional testimony

Text: Defendant next contends that the testimony of Guzzardo's parents was highly emotional and prejudicial. Defendant specifically argues that the statements of the Guzzardos that they had no sympathy for the defendant constitute error. The record shows that the prosecutor did in fact ask each of the Guzzardos whether they had any sympathy for the defendant, and they both answered this question in the negative. Assuming without deciding that this testimony was improper under Bernard, we find that its admission was harmless. [13] As we noted in State v. Taylor, 93-2201 (La.2/28/96), 669 So.2d 364: [S]urely the jury regarded the testimony of these victim impact witnesses as normal human reactions to the death of a loved one. That the victim's survivors might have little or no sympathy for the defendant surely would come as no surprise to a member of the jury. Especially in light of the credit that must be given to the good sense and fair-mindedness of jurors, we cannot say that the admission of these statements prejudiced defendant. This assignment of error thus lacks merit as to the no sympathy statements.