Opinion ID: 1709217
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: should the trial judge have sustained the defendant's objection to the prosecutor's calling him a liar during closing argument?

Text: The statements complained of are these: I think this case is a classic example of how, when given enough time, a criminal defendant, especially a murderer, can ... lie... . [D]o you believe this man right here that he would lie about it to save his neck? He said, `He was in bed with my wife. He didn't have any clothes on, except a t-shirt.' A blatant lie. I am going to tell you that the ends of justice by a not guilty verdict would not be served at all, if this man were allowed to fabricate, twist, distort, lie- Only the last statement was objected to at trial. The court overruled the objection, noting the wide latitude allowed during argument. The cases cited by the appellant deal with references made to issues not properly before the jury, such as the defendant's race, or his character, especially where he did not testify. In this case, the comment by the prosecutor was that the defendant was not telling the truth about the events of March 4, 1982. That can hardly be said to be an extraneous issue, since, if the State believed Simpson's story, he would not have been tried. There is no error here.