Opinion ID: 712827
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: Comment on Defendant's Objection to Evidence

Text: 58 During her closing argument, the prosecutor remarked, you heard Mr. Hirsh trying to object to the admission of that evidence and it was overruled. While Thierman did not object to the comment, the district court expressed its concern over the impropriety of it. (Trial Tr., 10/29/95 at 60). In response, the court instructed the jury, for a second time, that the defense has an obligation to object and that they should not concern themselves with either the objections or the court's ruling on them. Id. at 61. Given this curative instruction, the overall tenor of the closing arguments as previously discussed, and the isolated nature of the comment, this comment alone would not warrant reversal. In the event of another trial, we assume the government will be able to restrain itself from making such comments. 59