Prosecutorial error; Improper vouching; People v Bahoda; Distinguishing People v Humphreys; Prejudice; Commenting on defense counsel’s honesty; People v Unger; Distinguishing People v Dalessandro; Appeal to sympathy; People v Watson; Curative instruction

The court held that the prosecutor did not commit error and, even if she did, defendant was not prejudiced. He was convicted of CSC I, kidnapping, felonious assault, and AWIGBH. On appeal, the court rejected his argument that “the prosecutor erred when she: (1) improperly vouched for the victim; (2) commented on defense counsel’s honesty; (3) appealed to the jury’s sympathy to secure a conviction; and (4) referenced evidence not in the record during closing argument.” Given the “procedural circumstances of the case and the context of the prosecutor’s comments, [she] did not improperly vouch for the victim. [Her] comments did not convey or imply she had special knowledge of the victim’s truthfulness. Rather, context demonstrates the prosecutor made the comments after presenting evidence of the victim’s assault.” In any event, defendant could not establish prejudice. In addition, while the prosecutor’s comments about defense counsel’s honesty “certainly insinuated that any testimony from defendant would have reliability issues and defense counsel knew as much,” the court did “not read the comments as suggesting that defense counsel knew defendant would lie in his testimony at trial or that counsel was ‘intentionally attempting to mislead the jury.’” Further, in “context, the prosecutor’s comments did not appeal to the jury’s sympathy. Rather, [they] were benign inquiries about the victim’s ability to continue after reviewing evidence of her assault.” Affirmed.