Opinion ID: 488112
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: the prosecutor's cross-examination of crespo.

Text: 20 At trial, the prosecutor asked Crespo on cross-examination: Did you tell    [Rodriguez], 'Don't die yet'? Did you tell him that? State Transcript at 392-93. Crespo contends that this question was so prejudicial that it denied him a fair trial. 21 We must limit our review of this claim to determining whether the prosecutor's question was so egregious that it fatally infected the entire trial, rendering it fundamentally unfair and denying Crespo due process. Hamilton v. Nix, 809 F.2d 463, 470, 470 n. 4 (8th Cir.1987) (en banc). Crespo can meet this burden only by showing that absent the prosecutor's question there is a reasonable probability that the jury would have returned a different verdict. Id. at 470. 22 Initially, we note that Crespo's attorney neither objected to this question nor requested an immediate curative instruction. We also note that the trial court's general charge to the jury contained a pattern jury instruction that states in part: You must not assume as true any fact solely because included in or suggested by a question asked a witness. A question is not evidence, and may be considered only as it supplies meaning to the answer. 1 Mo. Approved Instructions--Criminal 2.02, at 2-5 (2d ed. 1979). 23 Further, given the admissibility of Crespo's statements to Nichols and Scego, we find that the evidence against him was overwhelming. Although both of Crespo's statements supported his self-defense theory, they gave inconsistent versions of the shooting. Two of Rodriguez's neighbors gave eyewitness testimony that substantially undermined Crespo's self-defense theory. Other testimony rebutted Crespo's claim that he neither armed himself nor went in search of Rodriguez until after Rodriguez came to Crespo's home and made threats against Crespo's life. We thus conclude that there is no reasonable probability that the jury would have returned a different verdict absent the prosecutor's question. 24 Accordingly, we affirm the district court's denial of Crespo's petition for a writ of habeas corpus.