P. v. Grant CA2/7
Christopher Grant argues that, had the trial court not erroneously admitted evidence of two prior convictions and the prosecutor not committed misconduct by referring to facts not in evidence, the jury would not have convicted him of assault with a deadly weapon and assault likely to produce great bodily injury. To the extent Grant did not preserve these issues because his trial counsel failed to object, Grant contends he received ineffective assistance. We conclude that Grant forfeited his prosecutorial misconduct argument and that, even if the court committed evidentiary error and Grant’s trial counsel was ineffective, overwhelming and virtually uncontested evidence supports Grant’s convictions. Therefore, we affirm.
Comments on P. v. Grant CA2/7