Cited by

(It is improper for a prosecutor to make remarks “to inflame the minds of jurors with passion or prejudice or influence the verdict in any degree.” ()).

An argument is improper when it “appeal[s] to the jurors’ emotions, passions, or prejudices by urging them to convict defendant for reasons wholly irrelevant to his own guilt or innocence.” (quotations omitted).

“Whether a death is ‘in furtherance’ of an underlying felony is ordinarily a question to be determined by the trier-of-fact.”

An argument is improper when it “appeal[s] to the jurors’ emotions, passions, or prejudices by urging them to convict defendant for reasons wholly irrelevant to his own guilt or innocence.” (quotation omitted).

(jury presumed to follow limiting instruction).

(holding there was sufficient evidence the defendant committed felony murder with a kidnapping predicate where “the kidnapping occurred when the victim was beaten on her bed and dragged down to the floor” and “[t]he murder occurred later, when she was strangled on the floor”— showing distinct acts); (holding there was “substantial evidence supporting the jury’s determination that the [victim’s] murder resulted from an act taken to facilitate the [victim’s] kidnapping” despite a lack of direct ev

¶61 Counsel improperly appeals to the jury’s emotions when their statements “urge the jury ‘to convict [the] defendant for reasons wholly irrelevant to his own guilt or innocence.’” ¶ 109 (2018) ().

(explaining jurors are presumed to follow instructions); (“The trial judge is able to sense the atmosphere of the trial, the manner in which the objectionable statement was made, and the possible effect it had on the jury and the trial.”).

10 STATE v. YORK Decision of the Court urging them to convict [the] defendant for reasons wholly irrelevant to his own guilt or innocence.” (internal quotations omitted).

-97 (1993) (internal quotation omitted).

They cross the line into this victim’s residence, his sanctuary, and they beat him to death with no less than three blows to the head and many more to his body.” The terms “home” and “sanctuary” did not “improperly appeal to the jurors’ emotions, passions or prejudices by urging them to convict [Wylie] for reasons wholly irrelevant to his own guilt or innocence.”

See Morris, 215 Ariz. at 337, ¶ 58 (stating a prosecutor is not permitted to make arguments that “appeal to the fears or passions of the jury”); (explaining the latitude afforded counsel is not unlimited and a prosecutor may not use “his remarks to inflame the minds of jurors with passion or prejudice”).

It is improper for a prosecutor to misstate the law in closing arguments, or make remarks “to inflame the minds of jurors with passion or prejudice or influence the verdict in any degree,” ().

As for the comments during the State’s rebuttal closing argument, a prosecutor cannot “urge jurors to convict a criminal defendant in order to protect community values, preserve civil order, or deter future law breaking.” (citation omitted).

–97 (1993) (finding no misconduct where prosecutor urged jurors “to do justice” if burden of proof was met); ¶ 210 (2016) (finding no misconduct where prosecutor argued that “[w]e are seeking a just punishment for what this defendant has done”); see also State v. Aguilar, 217

31 STATE v. ACUNA VALENZUELA Opinion of the Court “Prosecutors are given ‘wide latitude’ in closing arguments.” Goudeau, 239 Ariz. at 468 ¶ 210 ().

201 Ariz. at 540, ¶ 52 ().

(“Jurors are presumed to follow instructions.”) ().

62 STATE V. GOUDEAU Opinion of the Court

–97, –10 (1993) (concluding that “prosecutor’s statements about justice and protecting society” were not improper); (“[A]rguments referring to the prevalence of crime, the duty of the jury, and the efforts of the police in combatting

“If reasonable men may fairly differ as to whether certain evidence establishes a fact in issue, then such evidence must be considered as substantial.”

(finding evidence relating to the identity of the shooter irrelevant when defendant convicted of felony murder and acquitted of premeditated murder).