Opinion ID: 2382056
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Comments Were Improper

Text: The first step in appellate review of prosecutorial misconduct asks if the prosecutor's actions were in fact improper. We have recently held that prosecutorial use of the word lie and the various forms of lie are categorically improper. Compare Crider, 186 P.3d at 41-42, and Domingo-Gomez, 125 P.3d at 1050-51 (both explicitly holding that there is a categorical prohibition against using the word lie), with Harris v. People, 888 P.2d 259, 263-64 (Colo.1995), and Wilson, 743 P.2d at 418-19 (both stating a broad test for prosecutorial misconduct that could find using the word lie improper but stopping short of explicitly stating a categorical rule prohibiting it). The prohibition stems from the right to a fair trial by an impartial jury guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment of the United States Constitution and article II, sections 16 and 23 of the Colorado Constitution. See Harris, 888 P.2d at 263. We have observed that [t]he word lie is such a strong expression that it necessarily reflects the personal opinion of the speaker. When spoken by the State's representative in the courtroom, the word lie has the dangerous potential of swaying the jury from their duty to determine the accused's guilt or innocence on the evidence properly presented at trial. Domingo-Gomez, 125 P.3d at 1050. Just three years later, we again explained that the word lie is prohibited not only because it poses a risk of communicating the lawyer's personal opinion about the veracity of a witness and implying that the lawyer is privy to information not before the jury, but also simply because the word lie is an inflammatory term, likely (whether or not actually designed) to evoke strong and negative emotional reactions against the witness. Crider, 186 P.3d at 41. For these reasons, we again emphasize that a prosecutor acts improperly when using any form of the word lie in reference to a witness's or defendant's veracity. Thus, we hold that the prosecutor in this case acted improperly each time he used the words lies, lied, and liar in relation to the defendant Wend.