Opinion ID: 625333
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Putting Words Into Defendants' Mouths

Text: Defendants also argue that the prosecutor engaged in misconduct by putting words into their mouths by stating at closing that the defense said that government witnesses had lied on the stand. The prosecutor said: So, Defense says, `Well, perhaps the box may have had some markings on it.' So what they are saying, ladies and gentlemen, to you, is that these officers got on this witness stand and told you a story. They lied to you. Defense counsel objected to this, but on vouching grounds rather than prosecutorial misconduct. [A] party fails to preserve an evidentiary issue for appeal not only by failing to make a specific objection, but also by making the wrong specific objection. United States v. Gomez-Norena, 908 F.2d 497, 500 (9th Cir.1990); see also United States v. Sioux, 362 F.3d 1241, 1245 n. 5 (9th Cir.2004). Therefore we review this for plain error. We will overturn a conviction because of statements in closing arguments for plain error only where the statement undermine[s] the fundamental fairness of the trial and contribute[s] to a miscarriage of justice. United States v. Gwaltney, 790 F.2d 1378, 1386 (9th Cir. 1986) (quoting Young, 470 U.S. at 16, 105 S.Ct. 1038). A prosecutor may not question a defendant on the stand and ask him whether another witness was lying. United States v. Greer, 640 F.3d 1011, 1023 (9th Cir.2011). However, that is not what happened here. Instead, during rebuttal, the prosecutor summarized the argument made by defense counsel. He did not summarize anything said by Defendants on the stand. The prosecutor's statement did not undermine the fundamental fairness of the trial and contribute to the miscarriage of justice because it was in rebuttal to defense counsel's statements. Before this statement by the prosecutor, defense attorneys commented on the government witnessesimplying the witnesses had lied. Defense counsel argued that the government witnesses had changed their stories, had said one thing but written another in the report, had a bias, had pressure to change their story, and that the testimony had changed 180 degrees. The responsive argument by the prosecutor summarizing the defense counsel's argument does not undermine the fundamental fairness of the trial or contribute to a miscarriage of justice. There is no plain error.