Opinion ID: 2460227
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Your Neighbors

Text: The State ended its guilt phase closing argument: When this trial is over you'll have a chance to go home. Then you can talk to your neighbors and your friends about this case.... You can tell them about a man who beat his wife over and over again. . . . . After you tell your friends and neighbors, then they're going to ask you []what did you find him?[] Well, we just convicted him of murder second degree. And they're going to look at you and they're going to say based on that? Based on what that man did to that women? Defense counsel did not object. Johnston claims this was ineffective assistance of counsel because of the alleged impropriety and prejudicial nature of these remarks. Johnston does not identify with more specificity the basis for this claim. This Court has said that personalized argument designed to suggest that jurors are in danger if the defendant is acquitted is improper. State v. Phillips, 940 S.W.2d 512, 519 (Mo. banc 1997). The argument in Johnston's trial is of a different ilk. It suggests not personal danger, but an inability to justify a second-degree murder conviction on the basis of the evidence in this case. This is not improper argument. The motion court did not err in overruling this point.