Opinion ID: 1611770
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Failure to Object During Penalty Phase Closing

Text: Cole claims that trial counsel failed to object to prosecutorial misconduct during penalty phase closing argument. Cole argues that the prosecutor told the jury that William Paul could not have cut John Edwards with a knife, as Paul's hand was broken, and that the statement was inaccurate because Paul's left hand was hurt but was not broken. In rejecting this claim, the trial court found: The evidence in this cause demonstrates that Paul's hand was not broken. However, it is also clear that Paul's hand was badly injured after the initial altercation with John Edwards. Pam Edwards testified that Paul was moaning and said he thought his hand was broken. She also testified that Defendant had her roll a joint for Paul because his hand was cut and swollen. John Tomson [sic] testified that when Defendant and Paul arrived at his trailer, he noticed Paul was in pain and that his hand was swollen and quite large. Mary Gamble testified that when Paul arrived at the trailer his hand was very swollen up and he could barely move it. The evidence demonstrates that even though Paul's hand was not broken, it was injured to the point that he may have had difficulty using it. Therefore, even though the prosecutor's statement that Paul's hand was broken was technically incorrect, it was not prejudicial to the outcome. Therefore, trial counsel's failure to object to the broken hand comment was not prejudicial. State v. Cole, No. 94-498-CF, order at 12-13 (Fla. 5th Cir. Ct. order filed Feb. 18, 2000) (record citation omitted). We find no error in the trial court's determination in respect to this subclaim that Cole is not entitled to any relief.