Opinion ID: 1711324
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 33

Heading: Comment on Motion to Suppress

Text: Roberts claims his due process rights were violated when the prosecutor made a passing comment referencing Roberts's motion to suppress his confession. The prosecutor, while examining a police detective, said the following: And you were pointed to your previous motions testimony.... And I thinkI don't know if you were shown the transcript or not. Well, let's mark it as State's Exhibit 243. Transcript, Motions to Suppress. Defense counsel immediately objected and requested a mistrial. The trial court refused to grant a mistrial, but did admonish the prosecutor to make sure he said nothing further about a motion to suppress. The prosecutor made no further mention of the motion to suppress. This inadvertent error on the part of the prosecutor hardly constitutes extraordinary circumstances that require the drastic remedy of a mistrial. The trial court did not err in overruling Roberts's motion. Roberts also contends that his counsel was ineffective for not preserving this issue in his motion for new trial. This is incorrect. Counsel did include this issue in the motion for new trial.