Appellate argument centers on prosecutor's closing remarks and plain-error review

Attorneys at an appellate oral argument in the appeal of Mr. Alton focused on whether a prosecutor's closing and rebuttal remarks improperly vouched for the alleged victim and injected broader societal themes into the jury's deliberations, and whether any such errors could be reviewed under Tennessee's plain-error standard. Defense counsel argued the prosecutor's closing went beyond permissible advocacy by asking jurors to “do justice for not just this victim, but all assault victims everywhere,” and by telling jurors that “what you heard from this witness, from this stand, was real, and it's evidence,” which defense counsel said “cannot be categorized as anything other than vouching.”