Opinion ID: 2631813
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Prosecutor's remarks about holding the gun.

Text: Next, we consider whether the prosecutor's remarks to Leitner during cross-examination concerning her knowledge of how to hold a gun were so prejudicial as to require reversal. An examination of the trial record reveals the following exchange: Q. Was the .380were you still pointing it? A. I don't remember. Q. Well, take the .22 then and show the jury how you were standing when you fired the .22 and how you were pointing it. Go ahead, pick it up. Go ahead and stand up, do the same thing, turn around, face the wall so it doesn't point at anybody. A. What do you want me to do with it? Q. Demonstrate how you shot the .22, what you were doing with the gun. Hold it like you fired it. Ma'am, you know how to hold the gun. A. (Witness complies with request.) Here, Leitner asserts that the most egregious remark occurred when the prosecutor stated, Hold it like you fired it. Ma'am, you know how to hold the gun. Again, Leitner contends that this remark was motivated by nothing but ill will. Leitner compares this exchange with remarks made by the prosecutor in State v. Gray, 25 Kan. App.2d 83, 958 P.2d 37 (1998). The comparison is unconvincing. In Gray, the defendant denied ownership of drug paraphernalia, including spoons and syringes, during cross-examination. The defendant further denied using intravenous drugs since a month and a half before a search warrant was executed. In response, the prosecutor told the defendant to show his arms. When the defendant complied, his arms apparently revealed no evidence of intravenous drug use, and the prosecutor stated to the jury: Sure saw a lot more on the day we arrested you. 25 Kan. App.2d at 85. There, the prosecutor's remarks, in essence, interjected a new, prejudicial assertion of unproven fact to the jury, i.e., that there were needle marks on the defendant's arms on the day of his arrest. Here, however, the prosecutor did not interject any new assertions of unproven fact. Jurors knew that Leitner had fired the gun, because she previously admitted that she fired the weapon into Michael's head. In addition, jurors knew that Leitner knew how to hold a gun because Gary Hockett testified that on September 4, 1998, he and Leitner had engaged in target practice with pistols behind the shop on her property. The record provides no evidence that the prosecutor's remark was motivated by ill will. Viewed in the light of the entire trial record, the complained-of conduct does not require a reversal.