Issue

Prosecutor's closing argument—child rape trial—defendant's sexual history—not grossly improper

Summary

In defendant's trial for multiple counts each of rape of a child and sex offense with a child, a prosecutor's closing argument was not so grossly improper as to require the trial court to intervene ex mero motu. First, the prosecutor's reference to a sexual encounter defendant had with an adult girlfriend was based on evidence that the Supreme Court held, under a separate analysis, had not been impermissibly admitted. Second, where the prosecutor insinuated that, based on defendant's statements that he did not use a condom during sex with adult partners, defendant could have gotten the child victim pregnant or infected her with a sexually transmitted disease, although the statement constituted an improper appeal to the jury's emotions, it was an isolated statement that was not so egregious as to require the trial court's intervention on its own initiative.

Summary from the North Carolina Reports digest (official subject index). Read the opinion →