Court Opinion

ID: 9523224
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 02:37:25.169777+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:04:44.030561
License: Public Domain

Concurring Opinion
Staton, P.J.
— I concur. However, I think that we should recognize that the fundamental right to counsel includes the right to make a final argument to the court or jury on the evidence. Herring v. New York (1975), 95 S.Ct. 2550. Final argument can not be denied to a criminal defendant. A trial court’s discretion does not go this far. The trial court may limit the scope of closing argument and its duration. The trial court may direct defense counsel to stay within the bounds of the evidence to assure an orderly, fair trial. Any other limitation upon final argument must be reasonable. As the United States Supreme Court pointed out in Herring v. New York, supra, at 2556:
*576‘Some cases may appear to the trial judge to be simple— open and shut — at the close of the evidence. And surely in many such cases a closing argument will, in the words of Mr. Justice Jackson, be ‘likely to leave [a] judge where it found him.’14 But just as surely, there will be cases where closing argument may correct a premature mis judgment and avoid an otherwise erroneous verdict. And there is no certain way for a trial judge to identify accurately which cases these will be, until the judge has heard the closing summation of counsel.10” (footnotes omitted).
Kilgore has failed to demonstrate on the record before this Court how Simmons v. U.S. (1968), 390 U.S. 377 is applicable to the evidence in his case and to the final argument that he planned to present. Without a record demonstrating a cogent application of Simmons v. U.S. to his proposed argument, this Court has no other choice but to affirm the trial court’s ruling.
Note. — Reported at 354 N.E.2d 254.