Court Opinion

ID: 9543458
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 16:45:47.479332+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:10:23.883998
License: Public Domain

PARKS, J.,
specially concurring:
I write separately to address the issue of prosecutorial misconduct. Although I agree that the prosecutor’s actions do not warrant reversal as they were not objected to at trial, I must point out that his comments were highly improper.
In the present case, the prosecutor repeatedly vouched for the credibility of the State’s witnesses and asserted that the defense counsel was confusing the issues with a “smoke screen.” As I stated in my separate opinion in Bechtel v. State, 738 P.2d 559, 562 (Okla.Crim.App.1987), this Court will not condone an officer of the court injecting his personal beliefs into the case or vouching for the credibility of his witnesses. However, I cannot say that the prosecutor’s comments rose to the level of fundamental error.
Accordingly, I concur.