People v. Mudd

Defendant argued on appeal that prosecution’s comments during rebuttal closing arguments constituted reversible error because they misrepresented the evidence and shifted the burden of proof. Defendant alternatively argued that defense counsel’s failure to object to the State’s rebuttal denied him of the effective assistance of counsel. Appellate court affirmed on the basis that counsel’s rebuttal constituted general knowledge that did not require an evidentiary foundation. The Illinois Supreme Court declined to adopt the rationale of the appellate court but affirmed on the basis that the State’s rebuttal argument did not constitute error. (ANNE M. BURKE, GARMAN, THEIS, NEVILLE, MICHAEL J. BURKE and OVERSTREET, concurring)