Court Opinion

ID: 9836813
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-02 03:15:08.761354+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:45:18.961057
License: Public Domain

EFFRON, Judge,
with whom
SULLIVAN, Judge, joins (concurring in part and in the result):
I agree with the majority’s prohibition against “Golden Rule” arguments and with the observation that counsel’s argument must be reviewed in context rather than in isolation. I do not agree with the majority’s view that, in the context of this case, there was no error.
After trial counsel made the first statement encouraging the jurors to “imagine being” the victim, the defense counsel objected to the improper argument. The military judge at that point should have admonished trial counsel about the limits of such argument, rather than overruling the objection. Given free rein by the military judge’s erroneous ruling, trial counsel went on to violate the rule several more times, asking the members to:
Imagine. Just imagine the pain and the agony. Imagine the helplessness and the terror, I mean the sheer terror of being taped and bound, you can’t move. You’re being taped and bound almost like a mummy. Imagine as you sit there and they start binding.
The foregoing passage underscores the import and context of trial counsel’s remarks. Repeatedly urging the members to imagine themselves as the victim reflects trial counsel’s request that the members “judge the issue from the perspective of personal interest,” which is impermissible. United States v. Shamberger, 1 MJ 377, 379 (1976), quoting United States v. Wood, 18 USCMA 291, 296, 40 CMR 3, 8, 1969 WL 5996 (1969).
Under these circumstances, the content and context of trial counsel’s argument was clear, and the military judge erred by failing to act in light of the defense objection. Nonetheless, although the facts and circumstances reflected in the majority opinion do not show an absence of error, I agree that they demonstrate that the error was harmless in the context of this case. See Art. 59(a), Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 USC § 859(a).