P. v. Potter CA4/2
Defendant and appellant Ronald Edward Potter challenges his conviction for felony intent to evade a police officer with willful and wanton disregard for the safety of persons and property (“felony reckless evading”), in violation of Vehicle Code section 2800.2. He argues that the prosecutor committed misconduct by mischaracterizing the law in closing argument, because the prosecutor represented that the law states that the jury “should” consider evidence of the defendant’s flight in determining his guilt, where the law states that such evidence “may show” defendant’s guilt. We find that this argument was forfeited by failing to object at the time so that the court could correct any misstatement. We are not in any event convinced that the prosecutor’s statements misstated the law. We therefore affirm.
Comments on P. v. Potter CA4/2