Court Opinion

ID: 9511710
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-06 22:07:19.929526+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:05:08.160371
License: Public Domain

JUSTICE LEAPHART,
concurring.
¶42 I specially concur. Given our conclusion in Issue two, I question the necessity to analyze Issue one-that is, whether defense counsel waived objection to the prosecutor’s comments by failing to object contemporaneously during closing argument. If, as we conclude in Issue two, the comments were “fair and reasonable” and did not prejudice the defendant, then logic dictates that there was no basis for an objection in the first instance. Since there was no basis for an objection, it is entirely unnecessary to impugn the performance of defense counsel by concluding that he failed to make a timely objection. The Opinion should simply conclude that since the prosecutor’s comments were fair and reasonable, defense counsel was not ineffective for failing to object to the comments and the District Court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion for a new trial.