This case presents question as to whether prosecutor committed misconduct by stating during rebuttal closing argument that, in response to defense counsel's argument: (1) he could not call specific witness to testify as to what third party told said witness because such testimony would be hearsay; (2) hearsay is "something that's said outside of court;" and (3) defense counsel knows that he (prosecutor) could not call said witness. Appellate Court, in reversing defendant's conviction on criminal sexual assault of child charge, found under plain error analysis that defendant was entitled to new trial because prosecutor committed clear error in misstating law regarding hearsay, since there are exceptions to hearsay rule, and in improperly suggesting that evidence of defendant's guilt existed, which because of defendant's objection, could not be brought before jury. Also, Appellate Court found error was prejudicial, since case involved credibility contest between defendant and two alleged minor victims and was closely balanced for purposes of plain error analysis. (Dissent filed.)
Illinois Supreme Court PLAs
Criminal Court
Closing Arguments