Court Opinion

ID: 9526867
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 03:25:24.769084+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:25:16.019660
License: Public Domain

N. J. Kaufman, J.
(concurring). I concur in the result reached by the majority opinion and its reasoning except insofar as it states that "[t]he closing argument made by the prosecutor was well within the bounds of legitimate and effective advocacy”. I cannot so classify the prosecutor’s repetition of the old adage that a lawyer should argue the facts if the law is against him, the law if the facts are against him, and attack the police if both are against him. While that remark did not amount to reversible error, it was improper and is not condoned. It should be noted that the remark mentioned above was at variance with an otherwise good closing argument. This, then, is a good opportunity to remind prosecutors thafei a good closing argument is not enhanced by a foray close to forbidden territory. No extra points are given for daring.