The following excerpt is from USA v. ROSS, No. CR S-99-0043 WBS EFB (E.D. Cal. 2011):
It is also true, however, that "the prosecution must have reasonable latitude to fashion closing arguments" and may "argue reasonable inferences based on the evidence." United States v. Molina, 934 F.2d 1440, 1445 (9th Cir. 1991). In a case "that essentially reduces to which of two conflicting stories is true, it may be reasonable to infer, and hence to argue, that one of the two sides is lying." Id. See also Dubria v. Smith, 224 F.3d 995, 1004 (9th Cir. 2000) ("a prosecutor is free to voice doubt about the veracity of a defendant's story").
Page 25
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.