 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Williams v. Commonwealth8/19/2005
en 65-70 mph, the truck began to rock, and Williams locked up the brakes. Stidham never made these statements during his testimony.
We must review this alleged ground for reversal under the palpable error standard in RCr 10.26 since Williams did not make a contemporaneous objection. A palpable error is one that affects the substantial rights of a party resulting in manifest injustice. In order to find palpable error occurred an appellate court must believe there is a substantial possibility that the outcome would have been different had the error not occurred.
In general, a prosecutor should confine his arguments to reasonable comments on the evidence and fair inferences that can be drawn from that evidence. The Supreme Court has stated that the focus when considering whether there has been prosecutorial misconduct should be on the overall fairness of the trial and a determination should be made if the conduct was so egregious as to deny the defendant due process of law.
Measured by this standard, as well as guided by the standard for finding palpable error, we do not believe any improprieties in the Commonwealth's closing argument were so egregious as to deny Williams due process. Nor do we believe there is a substantial possibility that the outcome of the trial would have been different.
Accordingly, the judgment of the Pike Circuit Court is affirmed.
KNOPF, JUDGE, CONCURS.
TAYLOR, JUDGE, CONCURS IN RESULT BUT WILL NOT FURNISH SEPARATE OPINION.
Page 1 2 3 4 Kentucky DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|