Opinion ID: 521478
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Vouching for a Witness's Credibility

Text: 25 Barrera contends that the prosecutor, by asking her why a customs inspector's testimony contradicted her own, improperly vouched for, and obliged her to comment on, the inspector's credibility. However, merely asking a defendant to speculate as to why his or her testimony conflicts with the testimony of a government witness does not amount to vouching for the government witness's credibility. See United States v. Wellington, 754 F.2d 1457, 1468 (9th Cir.1985), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 1032 (1986). Further, because the trial court sustained Barrera's objection to the question, Barrera was not obliged to comment on the inspector's veracity. In addition, the trial court gave a standard instruction on credibility of witnesses that eliminated any danger of prejudice. See United States v. Buras, 633 F.2d 1356, 1360-61 (9th Cir.1980). Thus, the prosecutor did not engage in misconduct. See Endicott, 803 F.2d at 513.