Opinion ID: 1781968
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 18

Heading: the judge's assistance to the district attorney on several occasions was improper and resulted in an unfair trial for defendant in violation of mississippi law and the united states constitution.

Text: Foster argues the trial judge on three occasions wrongfully assisted the prosecutor and that the judge's assistance constituted reversible error. Though Foster now complains of these alleged errors, he failed to do so at the relevant time during the proceedings and is thus procedurally barred from doing so before this Court. Cole v. State, 525 So.2d 365 (Miss. 1987). Foster complains of the following exchanges between the trial judge and the prosecutor: BY THE STATE: If your Honor please, I'm not sure how the Court wants me to rephrase it. I'm asking for the tendencies he has observed over his years as an investigator in this  BY THE COURT: Ask him what happened in this particular case.       BY THE DEFENSE: We have nothing further on this motion [to suppress], your Honor. BY THE COURT: Are you going to have redirect  rebuttal I mean? BY THE STATE: I think I have to, don't I, Judge? BY THE COURT: I think under Agee you do, but I'm going to take a brief recess before you do.       BY THE STATE: If your Honor please, they've made an objection and I did not understand the basis for their objection. Might I inquire as to what the basis for their objection is? BY THE COURT: The  the question is incomplete to ask that hypothetical. Make your question complete. BY THE STATE: I understand your Honor. Foster cites only West v. State, 519 So.2d 418 (Miss. 1988) in support of his contention that the statements by the trial judge served to impermissibly assist the State. That case is easily distinguished from the case sub judice. In West, the Court found the trial judge improperly, or unnecessarily, interjected himself into the proceedings a total of thirty times. Id. at 421. The Court continued: Of those thirty instances, twenty are of the type which may be characterized as coaching the district attorney. On nine occasions, the trial judge posed questions to witnesses where the district attorney's questions were ineffective. The questions by the trial judge generally served to strengthen the prosecution's case. Id. at 421. We find that the statements by the trial judge of which Foster complains simply do not rise to the level of impermissible interference found to exist in West. Any supposed error by the trial judge was harmless indeed. Furthermore, though Foster contends that the judge's statements posed a danger of his exerting an undue influence on the jury, we find this risk to be nonexistent considering that not one of the exchanges occurred within the jury's hearing. This assignment is both procedurally barred and without merit.