Opinion ID: 202188
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Invited improper inference.

Text: 35 Ortiz claims the prosecutor improperly invited the jury to infer that he was a knowing participant in the drug deal from the evidence that he possessed a small amount of drugs for personal use. We see no error in the government's use of this evidence. 3 Ortiz admitted that the marijuana and cocaine found in his glove compartment belonged to him. His possession of the drugs — and, inferentially, his prior knowledge of drug dealing — were relevant to his defense that he was an innocent bystander in Sosa's transaction. In no way did the prosecutor invite the jury to find Ortiz guilty simply because his personal drug use demonstrated bad character that made him likely to commit the crime. Rather, the prosecutor used his past experience with drugs to help establish that he knew exactly what was going on that night. 36 We thus conclude that none of the asserted flaws in the prosecutor's closing argument warrant reversal of appellant's conviction.