UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, APPELLEE,
v.
CHARLES A. JONES, APPELLANT
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that the prosecutor's ambiguous remark and the trial court's immediate and repeated curative instructions adequately addressed any potential error.
The defendant was convicted of passing counterfeit Federal Reserve Notes. During closing arguments, the prosecutor made a remark that the defendant co…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Curative Instruction cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM:
Jones was convicted of violating 18 U.S.C. § 472 (passing and possessing counterfeit Federal Reserve Notes). He appeals, contending that the prosecutor in final argument alluded to his failure to take the stand, and that the court’s curative instructions were inadequate.
The prosecutor asked an ambiguous rhetorical question about the defendant’s ability to speak. He quickly corrected himself, and the court likewise immediately told the jury that the defendant is under no obligation to put on any evidence, or to take the stand. The denial of the motion for a mistrial was proper. In all, the trial court instructed the jury four different times that the defendant had no duty to prove, any thing, and specifically told the jury that it could draw no inference of guilt from the defendant’s failure to testify. Assuming that some incipient error may have lurked in the prosecutor’s remark, had it gone unchallenged, any possible error was fully cured by the judge’s instructions. United States v. Taitano, 442 F. 2d 467, 469 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 852, 92 S.Ct. 92, 30 L.Ed.2d 92 (1971).
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Worth v. United States, 404 U.S. 852 (U.S. 1971)
- Local Union No. 18 v. Hodgson, 404 U.S. 852 (U.S. 1971)
- United States v. Taitano, 442 F.2d 467 (9th Cir. 1971)