Opinion ID: 1111189
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 18

Heading: the prosecutor's comments during the trial were improper.

Text: This assignment of error arises out of a lengthy objection made by the prosecution to the introduction of some of Pinkney's clothing into evidence. The matter had previously been ruled on, in chambers. Also, it is argued that the following exchange between the prosecutor and Pinkney constitutes reversible error: Q. You think, then, the only reason that I'm upset about this is because a white woman was killed and a black man did it. A. Yes. Q. What would you say if I told you that two people have gotten the death penalty in this district who were white and killed a black man? A. I don't know because I can't say nothing. Q. I must not have been too mad at them. That just happened  MR. STRIBLING: Your Honor, this is far afield of cross examination, and I object to that. THE COURT: It will be sustained. MR. STRIBLING: And I also move for a mistrial too. THE COURT: Be overruled. The objection was properly made and sustained. If requested, an admonition would have also been proper. See Stokes v. State, 484 So.2d 1022, 1025 (Miss. 1986). However, no error was committed in denying the motion for mistrial.