Opinion ID: 1855709
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 27

Heading: Prison life references

Text: Defendant next contends the prosecutor impermissibly attempted to make out that life at Angola was a holiday camp. Defendant specifically alleges that the following cross-examination of his expert, Dean Foster, was improper: Q. But down at Angola they still get three square meals a day, don't they? A. They work-if they do what they're supposed to, they'll be fed and otherwise cared for. Q. They are allowed recreation? A. If they follow the rules. Q. Prison rodeos? A. No, not typically. They have a prison rodeo, but most inmates don't go to it or take part in it. The rodeo Q. Do they get to play basketball? A. The rodeo is for people off the prison grounds and not the inmates and Q. Under federal guidelines Although defendant contends this excerpt was error, he omits certain statements from defense trial counsel, which were made immediately after the above quoted passage: Mr. Hecker: Wait, your honor. Can he finish his answer? The Court: Let's [sic] him finish. Mr. Hecker: And one thing. I had not gone into prison life. We will let Mr. Sinquefield go to that. We didn't bring that up on direct. Let the jury hear that. We are not trying to hide anything. (Emph.added.) As can be shown from this excerpt, defense counsel explicitly encouraged the prosecutor to continue this line of questioning. As we said previously, although the lack of an objection does not preclude us from reviewing this assignment of error, this fact does suggest that this testimony seems more damaging in the cold record than it did in a live courtroom. We have previously found that prosecutorial argument that strayed into the privileges the defendant would have at Angola and that the victim would never again enjoy did not constitute reversible error. State v. Kyles, 513 So.2d 265 (La.1987). Similarly, we find that this testimony did not inject an arbitrary factor into the trial so as to warrant reversal. In light of the good sense and fairmindedness of the jurors, we find that the penalty imposed was surely unattributable to this evidence. This assignment of error thus lacks merit as to the admission of testimony about prison life.