Opinion ID: 1882598
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Failure to Object to Prosecutor's Inappropriate Closing Statements

Text: Suggs claims that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to adequately challenge the prosecutor's deployment of the following tactics: (1) using a golden rule argument; [8] (2) stating that the victim was a missing witness; [9] (3) commenting on Suggs' Fifth Amendment rights; [10] (4) making derisive statements about the defense attorneys; [11] and (5) making similar derisive statements about defense experts. [12] The postconviction court, relying on Ferguson v. State, 593 So.2d 508 (Fla. 1992), held that counsel adopted a reasonable strategy not to object to the prosecutor's comments. In Ferguson, this Court held that the choice not to object to a prosecutor's closing statements can be a tactical decision despite the fact that some of the comments were indeed objectionable. Ferguson, 593 So.2d at 511. As long as the prosecutor did not dwell upon the comments and they were not severely inflammatory or damaging, defense counsel remains effective. Id. Defense attorney Kimmel admitted at the evidentiary hearing that, in hindsight, maybe he should have made some objections but that his focus at the time was on maintaining a rapport with the jury and letting the prosecutor hurt himself. Defense attorney Stewart testified that defense counsel decided not to object because the prosecution was raising issues that the defense wanted the State to address and thereby was tacitly acknowledging the defense's arguments on those issues. We find that the postconviction court did not err in finding no deficiency in defense counsel's performance. The postconviction court's order is also supported by this Court's holding on direct appeal, which, in addition to dismissing as procedurally barred the substantive claim that the prosecutor's statements deprived him of a fair trial, went on to find that Suggs' substantive claim was without merit. The postconviction court's denial of this claim is therefore affirmed.