Opinion ID: 1910680
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Prosecutorial Comments in Opening and Closing

Text: In his opening statement to the jury the prosecutor began several sentences with the expression, We know. . . . Assuming that the repeated use of the expression we know in place of the State will attempt to prove, might suggest that the prosecutor was expressing his personal opinion on the facts to be elicited, we deem this erroneous use of language to be harmless. See State v. Pullen, Me., 266 A.2d 222, 228 (1970). We have scrutinized the entirety of these remarks carefully to determine whether or not potential prejudice might have been thereby generated, and we can find none. State v. Dana, Me., 406 A.2d 83 (1979). The justice below carefully instructed the jury that statements of the attorneys did not constitute evidence. He stated: It is your recollection of the evidence that controls, not what the attorneys say it was, not what I say it is; but what the twelve of you recall. Reading the record in its entirety, it is obvious to us that the jury understood the comments of the prosecutor to be merely an opening summary of what the State anticipated it would prove. Furthermore, the State did in fact introduce evidence of the various facts commented on by the prosecutor and, in the main, there was no evidence to contradict these facts. While we do not recommend the use of such language, we find no prejudice to defendant Fisher resulted therefrom. During the prosecutor's argument in summation and in rebuttal he is said, on appeal, to have misquoted the testimony. These arguments were not reported. As far as this claim of error is concerned, therefore, the matter is not capable of appellate review on this record. We will not decide such an issue on a silent record. State v. Taylor, Me., 343 A.2d 11, 21 (1975); State v. Greaves, Me., 281 A.2d 445 (1971).