Opinion ID: 2144314
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 11

Heading: State's Closing Argument at Sentencing

Text: Defendant contends that the trial court erred in allowing the State to make various arguments to the jury at the conclusion of the sentencing phase of trial. Specifically, defendant asserts that the State improperly argued that there was no excuse for defendant's crimes, that defense counsel was trying to make the jury feel guilty, that the evidence clearly established defendant's guilt, and that defendant's daughter was a cocaine baby. We hold that defendant waived these issues by failing to object contemporaneously when the arguments were made. People v. Miller, 173 Ill.2d 167, 191, 219 Ill.Dec. 43, 670 N.E.2d 721 (1996). Furthermore, because the evidence in this case was not closely balanced, and because the State's arguments did not deny defendant a fair trial, we will not address these issues under the plain error doctrine. Miller, 173 Ill.2d at 191-92, 219 Ill.Dec. 43, 670 N.E.2d 721.