Opinion ID: 200345
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Personal Opinion of the Evidence

Text: 50 We reject Henderson's argument that the prosecutor improperly interjected his personal opinion of the evidence when he characterized as absurd the defense's assertion that Powers was under the influence of drugs during the transactions. A prosecutor may attempt to persuade the jury to draw suggested inferences unfavorable to the defense, as long as the prosecutor's own opinion as to the witness' credibility is not urged on the jury. United States v. Smith, 982 F.2d 681, 683 (1st Cir.1993). 51 In this case, the prosecutor offered no opinion concerning the credibility of the defense witnesses. Instead, during his closing argument, the prosecutor responded to a persistent suggestion made by the defendant that Powers had been on drugs during the transactions and thus could not remember the detailed information she provided during her testimony. The prosecutor did this by asking the jury to focus on the tape recordings made of those transactions: 52 And don't the tapes prove to you how absurd the defendant's claims are that Powers was too high or too crazy to have accurately perceived the events which occurred during the conspiracy? Don't the tapes, in fact, prove that Powers became suspicious that Special Agent Guerard might be a cop right after she met him? 53 It is apparent that the prosecutor asked the jury to consider whether the evidence before it — tape recordings in which Powers correctly perceived that Mozynski's alleged drug customer was an undercover police officer — refuted defendant's contention that Powers' mind was too altered to observe and remember the drug transactions. There was nothing improper in the government identifying for the jury a specific item of evidence and arguing that the jury should infer from that piece of evidence that the defendant's theory was not worthy of belief. See United States v. Mount, 896 F.2d 612, 625 (1st Cir.1990); United States v. Garcia, 818 F.2d 136, 143 (1st Cir.1987). Accordingly, the district court did not commit plain error by allowing the prosecutor's statement. 54 Henderson challenges other statements in the government's closing on the ground that the prosecutor again offered his personal opinion of the evidence when he told the jury: 55 Look at the evidence with a very stern and suspicious eye. And if you do that, you'll have no doubt that the government has sustained its burden. 56 Henderson says these statements implied that the jury could not return a verdict of not guilty without failing to consider the evidence closely. What Henderson fails to consider is that a prosecutor has a right to comment on the plausibility of the defense theory. See Garcia, 818 F.2d at 143. Here, the prosecutor suggested that a careful review of the evidence would reveal that the government's theory of the case was more plausible than Henderson's theory of the case. This suggestion properly directed the jury's attention to the evidence presented at trial. 57 We also disagree with Henderson that the prosecutor interjected his personal opinion of the evidence in rebuttal when he commented if you ask the wrong questions, you get the wrong answers, and if you ask the right questions in this case, there's no doubt but that their clients will be convicted. These comments were not inappropriate because [a]lthough it is the jury's job to draw inferences, there is nothing improper in the Government's suggesting which inferences should be drawn. Mount, 896 F.2d at 625. 58 Here, the prosecutor argued that Henderson's theory of the case directed the jury to the wrong questions, whereas the government's theory directed it to the right questions; presumably, these were questions based on the evidence. We see no reason why the prosecutor should be prohibited from suggesting that the government's theory of the case did a better job of focusing on the evidence. The prosecutor was entitled to argue that the jury should look at the evidence to determine Henderson's guilt. We see no plain error.