United States Ninth Circuit

Prosecutor's misstatement during closing argument, that jury could not consider mitigating circumstances in penalty phase of trial, is harmless given curative jury instruction that they could consider those circumstances.

Appellate Information

• Decided 08/02/2001
• Published 08/02/2001

Judges

• Before SCHROEDER, Chief Judge, PREGERSON, KOZINSKI, TROTT, FERNANDEZ, T.G. NELSON, TASHIMA, W. FLETCHER, PAEZ, BERZON and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Ninth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• Bill Lockyer, Attorney General of the State of California, Robert R. Anderson, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Gary W. Schons, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Frederick R. Millar, Jr., Deputy Attorney General, A. Natasha Cortina, Deputy Attorney General, Nancy L. Palmieri, Deputy Attorney General, Esteban Hernandez, Deputy Attorney General, San Diego, California, for respondent-appellant Jeanne S. Woodford., Maria E. Stratton, Federal Public Defender, Dean R. Gits, Deputy Federal Public Defender, Office of the Federal Public Defender, Los Angeles, California, and Rosalie L. Rakoff, A Professional Corporation, Santa Monica, California, for petitioner-appellee William Charles Payton.