Opinion ID: 1057701
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 17

Heading: The Prosecutor's Reference to a Prior Conviction for Theft of Property

Text: In her argument challenging Mr. Banks's assertion that he had no significant criminal history, the prosecutor mentioned an incident involving a theft of property that occurred when Mr. Banks was a juvenile. Mr. Banks objected, and during a bench conference, the trial court instructed the prosecutor to explain to the jury that it could not consider this incident. Following the bench conference, the prosecutor stated to the jury: I apologize. I mis[-]spoke. The theft of property that you heard about was one that wasn't sustained or handled non-judicially, which means it did not stay on the defendant's criminal background. Without further objection by Mr. Banks, the prosecutor detailed other criminal offenses committed by Mr. Banks, including aggravated assault, aggravated burglary, criminal attempt to commit aggravated burglary, and domestic assault. Mr. Banks insists that the prosecutor's correction of her improper statement regarding the juvenile theft of property offense did not cure the error. We disagree. The trial court did not list the juvenile theft conviction among the offenses that the jury could consider in ascertaining the applicability and weight of the claimed mitigating circumstance that Mr. Banks did not have a significant criminal history. In light of the number of and seriousness of the other offenses that Mr. Banks had committed, as well as the fact that the trial court did not include the juvenile theft offense among those that the jury could consider, we decline to find that the prosecutor's original erroneous statement requires a reversal of Mr. Banks's conviction. D.