Maryland Criminal & Immigration Lawyer Blog
Sometimes, prosecutors make statements that fall outside the bounds of what the law and the rules of court procedure allow. Many of these errors are modest, but others are severe transgressions. The latter requires more than just a sustained objection to a prosecutorial question if the defendant is to receive a fair trial. Spotting these mistakes and making the appropriate requests of the judge are crucial parts of ensuring a full and appropriate defense and are essential ways in which an experienced Maryland criminal defense lawyer can help a person accused of a crime.
A recent sex crime case from Prince George’s County illustrates one form of egregious misstep that prosecutors can make.
The trial involved D.J., a man accused of having sex with a 15-year-old girl. The accused acknowledged a relationship but stated that the sexual affair did not begin until the alleged victim was 18.
One of the defense witnesses who contradicted the alleged victim’s testimony was the accused man’s wife. During cross-examination, the prosecutor asked the wife, “If your husband had told you that he had told a detective that he had sexual contact with [the alleged victim], would he be lying about that?”
The defense attorney objected, and the court sustained the objection. The wife did not answer the question, but the jury found the defendant guilty.
As a layperson, one might not see much hope for this man on appeal. The man’s trial counsel objected, and the court sustained the objection, so there was nothing to protest, right? Fortunately, the man’s appellate counsel recognized that the law says differently.
The crux of this man’s successful appeal was the specific type of question the prosecutor asked his wife. Answers to “Was the defendant lying” questions are considered testimony in which the witness opines about the defendant’s credibility or truthfulness. The Maryland Supreme Court has expressly prohibited prosecutors from asking for those sorts of opinions.
Not only are these questions barred as a matter of Maryland law, but they are also “improperly argumentative,” according to the Supreme Court. According to the high court, these questions create a no-win situation where the accused must “choose between answering in a way” that might make the jury believe “he was lying or… risk… alienating the jury by accusing the [witness] of lying.”
The questioning in the church member’s case placed the wife in a no-win scenario. She could answer “yes,” implying that her husband lied to the detective, or “no,” suggesting that the husband lied to her or that she herself lied.
When a Sustained Objection Is Not Enough
In many situations, a trial court’s decision to sustain an objection by the defense is enough. Other times, the accused’s right to a fair trial requires more. That “more” comes into play when the state’s remarks are egregiously out-of-bounds. In those settings, the negative impact the prosecutor’s words could have requires, at a minimum, that the judge state his decision to sustain the objection on the record and in front of the jury “so that the jury would be made aware of the prosecutor’s clear transgression.”
In some cases, the proper outcome may call for asking the court to strike the prosecutor’s comments and “admonishing the jury to disregard them.” Those are things that a defense attorney can proactively request when he or she spots egregious prosecutorial missteps.
Presenting a full and effective defense involves many small (and sometimes easily overlooked) steps. To ensure your rights are protected, you need a legal advocate who is strong, knowledgeable, and detail-oriented. At Anthony A. Fatemi, LLC, our experienced Maryland criminal defense attorneys work every day to provide that sort of representation and to ensure our clients get the fair trials they deserve. Contact us today at 301-519-2801 or via our online form to set up your consultation to learn more.