Opinion ID: 1127477
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 18

Heading: Dr. Fukomoto

Text: Defendant contends the prosecutor employed aggressive leading questioning to elicit the desired testimony from Dr. Fukomoto that Lingle was alive when she was impaled by the stake. This claim is meritless. Contrary to defendant's assertion, Fukomoto did not imply in his testimony that Lingle was impaled by the stake four minutes after her heart stopped, and then change that testimony out of misunderstanding or simple desire to give the prosecutor the testimony he wanted. Rather, Fukomoto testified consistently and repeatedly that in his opinion Lingle was impaled while she was alive. On cross-examination, he continued to assert this opinion. Defense counsel then elicited testimony that Lingle's heart could have stopped anywhere from one to five minutes after the carotid artery was severed. On redirect, the prosecutor asked, Whatever the time was, whether it was five minutes or one minute from the point that the artery was cut, do we know that, in whatever time there was left, that that stake was impaled before her heart stopped beating? Fukomoto replied, Yes, sir. Such questioning simply clarified and reinforced Fukomoto's earlier testimony. There was no misconduct. 4. Closing Statement Defendant complains of several instances of alleged misconduct by the prosecutor during closing argument. None of these claims have merit.