Opinion ID: 78571
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Any Prosecutorial Misconduct Was Harmless

Text: Duran alleges that the Government engaged in prosecutorial misconduct during his closing argument by improperly commenting on the Rule 404(b) evidence, with statements that Duran spent the last ten years of his life bribing ... officials and that Duran had been involved in a life of crime. D.E. 422 at 82, 109-10. We review allegations of prosecutorial misconduct de novo because it is a mixed question of law and fact. Eckhardt, 466 F.3d at 947. In analyzing allegations of prosecutorial misconduct, we must assess whether the challenged comments were improper, and if so, whether they affected the substantial rights of the defendant. Campa, 529 F.3d at 997 (quoting United States v. Castro, 89 F.3d 1443, 1450 (11th Cir.1996)). A defendant's substantial rights are prejudicially affected when a reasonable probability arises that, but for the remarks, the outcome of the trial would have been different. Eckhardt, 466 F.3d at 947 (citing United States v. Wilson, 149 F.3d 1298, 1301 (11th Cir.1998)). When the record contains sufficient independent evidence of guilt, any error is harmless. Id. (citing United States v. Adams, 74 F.3d 1093, 1097-98 (11th Cir.1996)). Although the Government's comments could be construed by the jury as an effort to characterize the challenged remarks as improper propensity evidence, there was more than enough other evidence of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt for the jury to convict Duran of violating §§ 951 and 371. Because the district court properly instructed the jury as to the purpose for which Rule 404(b) evidence was introduced, we find that the prosecutor's comments did not prejudicially affect Duran's substantial rights at his trial, and therefore, any error was harmless.