What is the standard of argument in the closing argument of a criminal case?

As to the government's closing argument it has been said that "[i]n closing argument, both defense attorneys and prosecution attorneys are allowed reasonably wide latitude." United States v. Birges, 723 F.2d 666, 671-72 (9th Cir.) cert. denied, 466 U.S. 943 (1984). The prosecutor's inference that intimidation by appellant may have occurred is a permissible inference "as long as the prosecutor does not 'misstate or exceed the evidence in any significant respect.' United States v. Marques, 600 F.2d 742, 749 (9th Cir.) cert. denied, 444 U.S. 858 (1979). Improprieties in counsel's argument to the jury do not constitute reversible error 'unless they are so gross as probably to prejudice the defendant and the prejudice has not been neutralized by the trial judge.' " Birges, 723 F.2d at 672. There is nothing in the record to suggest that the prosecutor misstated or exceeded the evidence in any significant respect. Nor are the inferences in the government's argument so gross as to suggest that appellant was prejudiced.