Can a prosecutor make comments on the state of the evidence or on the defense's failure to call logical witnesses or introduce material evidence?

"Comments on the state of the evidence or on the defense's failure to call logical witnesses, introduce material evidence, or rebut the People's case are generally permissible. [Citation.] However, a prosecutor may not suggest that 'a defendant has a duty or burden to produce evidence, or a duty or burden to prove his or her innocence.' " (People v. Woods (2006) 146 Cal.App.4th 106, 112.)

Here, defense counsel argued there was no evidence defendant knew the shuriken was in his back pack, or that he knew it was a shuriken. Counsel suggested the shuriken may have been "picked off of the ground." The prosecutor responded to that argument by noting there was no evidence that defendant "happened to stumble across" the shuriken "on the ground." This was a comment on the state of the evidence, not a suggestion that defendant had the burden to produce that evidence. "A distinction clearly exists between the permissible comment that a defendant has not produced any evidence, and on the other hand an improper statement that a defendant has a duty or burden to produce evidence, or a duty or burden to prove his or her innocence." (People v. Bradford (1997) 15 Cal.4th 1229, 1340.)

Accordingly, we conclude there was no misconduct.

Page 11

The judgment is affirmed.