Opinion ID: 2713861
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The phrase “illusions of doubt”

Text: Farrow also faults the prosecution for using the phrase “illusions of doubt” seven times in closing argument, citing United States v. Procopio, 88 F.3d 21 (1st Cir. 1996) for the proposition that repeated use of the term “illusion” can be evidence of error. However, Procopio involved a prosecutor directly disparaging both defense counsel and the defense argument. Nonetheless, that court stated that “it is unrealistic to suggest that such empty clichés seriously affected the jury’s deliberations.” Id. at 32. Here, the prosecution’s use of “illusions of doubt” was not disparaging, and in rebuttal closing, the prosecution is entitled to point out the lack of evidence supporting the defense theory of the case See United States v. Forrest, 402 F.3d 678, 686 (6th Cir. 2005). The prosecution’s use of the phrase “illusions of doubt” was not improper.