P. v. Dominguez
Defendant challenges his conviction for second degree robbery. He first contends the prosecutor committed prejudicial misconduct during closing argument. Defendant has forfeited this argument because he did not object to the prosecutors argument or request an admonition from the trial court. Even if we were to reach the merits, we would conclude (1) the closing argument did not constitute misconduct, and (2) even if there was misconduct, there was no prejudice to defendant.
Defendant next argues substantial evidence did not support the jurys verdict. We also reject this argument. The victim of the robbery clearly identified defendant after the robbery, in a photographic lineup, and at trial. A police officer who had had numerous contacts with defendant also identified him from the stores security videotape. Therefore, Court affirm.
Comments on P. v. Dominguez