Court Opinion

ID: 9852935
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 05:39:23.888792+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:22:37.967926
License: Public Domain

ABBOTT, J.,
concurring: I concur in the majority opinion, but express my separate concern that we have painted defendants into a comer. Despite our recognition that a prosecutor’s argument to a jury can be so prejudicial as to be incurable, the rule we enforce is that if the defendant does not object to an improper closing argument the error is waived and if the defendant objects and the *675trial judge instructs the jury to disregard the improper argument the error is cured.
I am very concerned that prosecutors who have an ethical obligation to insure that defendants receive a fair trial are aware of this court’s tendency as set forth above. We are seeing far too many unethical, improper closing arguments. If this trend continues, I see no alternative but to grant a new trial even though the trial judge instructs the jury to disregard the improper remarks.
For a discussion on the subject see Johnson and Southard, Prosecutorial Misconduct in Closing Argument: Does Harmless Error Mean Never Having to Say “Reversed?", 49 J.K.B.A. 205 (1980).
Six and Davis, JJ., join the foregoing concurring opinion.