Opinion ID: 1127477
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 20

Heading: Alleged Invitation to Speculate

Text: Defendant contends that the prosecutor improperly urged the jury to speculate that defendant behaved poorly in prison and was still violent, that defendant was still a threat to other inmates, that multiple prison sodomies committed by defendant might have gone unreported, that defendant was so institutionalized he actually enjoyed his life in prison such that life imprisonment without the possibility of parole would be no punishment for him at all, and that the jury could consider whether defendant was smiling when he stabbed Lingle, in violation of his right to due process. Defendant waived these arguments by failing to object. ( People v. Berryman, supra, 6 Cal.4th at p. 1072.) They are also meritless. We have reviewed each of the challenged statements, and conclude they were all fair inferences drawn from the evidence. Contrary to defendant's assertion, none of the prosecutor's comments ask[ed] the jurors to speculate, rather than relying upon the facts proven by the evidence admitted at trial, or solicited the jurors to disregard the law.