The following excerpt is from U.S. v. Tran, 945 F.2d 410 (9th Cir. 1991):
The prosecutor was attempting to state that admissible evidence was one of three elements needed for a conviction: evidence, law, and the jury's common sense. The judge upheld the defense objection and reminded the jury that they had heard all the evidence. Consequently, error, if any, was corrected by the judge's remedial measures. See United States v. Solomon, 825 F.2d 1292, 1300 (9th Cir.1987).
Looking at the evidence submitted, the context of the remarks, and the overall trial, this court finds that the prosecutor's comments did not materially affect the fairness of the trial. "[R]emarks must be examined in the context of the trial to determine whether the prosecutor's behavior amounted to prejudicial error." United States v. Young, 470 U.S. 1, 12 (1985). Any minimal damage caused by the statements were cured by the judge's instruction.
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.