Opinion ID: 2599941
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Comment on lack of remorse

Text: We find no merit in defendant's contention that the prosecutor commented on defendant's failure to testify, in violation of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments as construed in Griffin v. California, supra, 380 U.S. 609, 85 S.Ct. 1229, 14 L.Ed.2d 106. The prosecutor argued that defendant's evidence of remorse was unconvincing because he had not fully accepted responsibility for his crimes. Numerous defense witnesses testified that defendant had expressed remorse about the crime but none testified that he had admitted what he had done; indeed, they testified that he had refused to discuss his involvement or claimed not to be able to recall what had happened. For example, Dr. Rosenthal testified that defendant was upset that someone was killed and that he was involved, but claimed not to remember any specific thing that he had done. Similarly, Mr. Shiraldi testified that defendant felt responsible for what had happened and felt remorse, but that defendant claimed not to recall what had happened. Father Wood testified that defendant had admitted committing a crime and had said he was sorry. The prosecutor's argument was not a reference to defendant's failure to testify but was a fair comment on the defense evidence of remorse.