Opinion ID: 1719467
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: did the lower court err in denying shavers' motion for mistrial due to the prosecutor's improper closing argument?

Text: No contemporaneous objection was made by defense counsel to the following three remarks by the district attorney: When the deputies had him downstairs that night did he say, `Naw, I didn't do it. I got an alibi. Y'all please check this alibi.' Did he do that? Did he have the explanation of syphilis? No. He hadn't got back and talked with his lawyer yet. No evidence can prove it beyond all doubt. It's just like when asked: do you know there is a God? None of us can know it. No personal knowledge of him who haven't seen him, but we can read the Bible and can hear the word of God and can be convinced in your belief to a certainty that there is a God. After the jury had retired to consider the verdict, defense counsel moved for a mistrial. The trial court denied this motion because objection was not made in a timely manner, but was instead asserted after all arguments were concluded and the jury had retired, and was therefore waived. No error was assigned as to the prosecutor's remarks in Shavers' motion for new trial. In Hill v. State, 432 So.2d 427 (Miss. 1983), this Court held that contemporaneous objections must be made to improper argument by the state, and unless such objection is made, any claimed error for such improper argument will not be considered on appeal. (citations omitted) Id. at 439-440. In Hill as in this case defense counsel failed to assign the prosecutor's closing remarks as error in his motion for new trial. There is no merit to appellant's assignment number 3. We have examined this record and find no merit to any of the appellant's assignments of error and, therefore, we affirm his conviction and sentence. AFFIRMED. WALKER and ROY NOBLE LEE, P.JJ., and BOWLING, HAWKINS, DAN M. LEE, PRATHER and ROBERTSON, JJ., concur. PATTERSON, C.J., not participating.