Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Panel weighs claims that prosecutor’s closing remarks created miscarriage of justice
Summary
Appellate counsel argued pervasive improper remarks in closing argument, including alleged appeals to emotion and unsupported inferences that could have infected a guilty verdict; the Commonwealth acknowledged errors but contended the conviction remains supported. The court took the matter under advisement.
The appeals court heard argument in Commonwealth v. Francis Pena over whether the prosecutor’s closing argument contained so many improper statements that the guilty verdict sustained against the defendant posed a substantial risk of miscarriage of justice.
Appellate counsel Elizabeth Lazar pointed to repeated categories of alleged improprieties in the prosecutor’s closing, including…
Already have an account? Log in
Subscribe to keep reading
Unlock the rest of this article — and every article on Citizen Portal.
- Unlimited articles
- AI-powered breakdowns of topics, speakers, decisions, and budgets
- Instant alerts when your location has a new meeting
- Follow topics and more locations
- 1,000 AI Insights / month, plus AI Chat
