Prosecutorial Misconduct

March 1, 2017

In final argument, the DA argued that defense counsel and the defense expert in this rape case has “attacked” the victim in a previous, unrelated rape case, suggesting that counsel and the expert were willing to present whatever testimony necessary to avoid a conviction. The Court says that this was highly improper and “clearly” prosecutorial misconduct. The Court also found misconduct because the DA argued that the defense expert had been hired by defense counsel to make up a defense. They also find misconduct because the DA argued to the jury that there was something improper about defense counsel’s thorough cross-examination of the victim and that counsel was “taking advantage” of an “opportunity” to question her. Next, the Court finds misconduct because the DA insinuated in cross examination, and argued to the jury, that the defendant had been coached by defense counsel. The DA argued that the jury had the “right” to hold the defendant to account, by convicting him. Misconduct.



People v. Higgins; 2011 DJ DAR 697; DJ, 1/14/11; C/A 4th, Div. 1

Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter
Please reload

Featured Posts

I'm busy working on my blog posts. Watch this space!

Please reload

Recent Posts
Please reload

Please reload

Search By Tags
Please reload

Follow Us
  • Facebook Basic Square
  • Twitter Basic Square
  • Google+ Basic Square

About Us

We will familiarize you with the manner in which criminal proceedings take place and try to answer all your questions and address your concerns. We are available to you day and night, 24 hours a day and 7 days a week.

Quick Links

>  Home

>  About Our Attorneys

>  Blog

>  Contact

Contact Us

>  714-955-8365

© 2017 Rodney Nosratabadi. All Rights Reserved