Chapter 17 - § 17.4 DISCRETION OF COURT TO CONTROL CLOSING ARGUMENTS

• Jurisdiction: Colorado

§ 17.4 DISCRETION OF COURT TO CONTROL CLOSING ARGUMENTS

Colorado

➢ Limiting Amount of Time for Closing. "Limitation of the time for argument is within the discretion of the trial court." People v. Rodriquez, 645 P.2d 857, 859 (Colo. App. 1982).

➢ Both Sides Must Be Given Equal Opportunity to Submit a Closing Argument. Although it is error to not allow the opposing party the same chance to submit a summation in a trial to the court, the party complaining must show that the error was prejudicial. Poudre Valley Rural Electric Ass'n v. Loveland, 807 P.2d 547, 557 (Colo. 1991).

➢ Limiting Scope of Closing Argument. The court may prohibit types of argument in closing in advance of argument. People v. Flanders, 516 P.2d 418, 419 (Colo. 1973).

➢ Judge Has Discretion to Set Scope of Closing Argument. "[T]he permissible scope of argument is a matter that lies within the sound discretion of the trial judge." Rennels v. Marble Prods., Inc., 486 P.2d 1058, 1061 (Colo. 1971) (standard is abuse of discretion). In the absence of a gross abuse of discretion to the prejudice of a party, the court's ruling will not be disturbed on review. People v. Alvarez, 530 P.2d 506, 507 (Colo. 1975); People v. Ferrell, 613 P.2d 324, 326 (Colo. 1980).

➢ Improper Arguments Are Best Assessed and Cured by the Trial Court. Claims of improper argument must be evaluated in the context of the argument as a whole and in light of the evidence before the jury. Such evaluations are best done by the trial court. People v. Coit, 961 P.2d 524, 530 (Colo. App. 1997); People v. Holloway, 973 P.2d 721, 724 (Colo. App. 1998); People v. Geisendorfer, 991 P.2d 308, 312 (Colo. App. 1999); People v. Rojas, 181 P.3d 1216 (Colo. App. 2008); People v. Gladney, 250 P.3d 762 (Colo. App. 2010); People v. Cordova, 293 P.3d 114, 121 (Colo. App. 2011).

➢ Improper Reference to Future Damages. Even though the court had held that there was no evidence of future damages, the court had the discretion to deny a motion for mistrial when an improper reference to such future damages was made during closing argument. Brown v. Kreuser, 560 P.2d 105, 108-09 (Colo. App. 1977).
➢ Court May Not Preclude Arguments That Are Based upon Admitted Evidence. The court erred when it prohibited the defendant from arguing his theory of the case, which was based on admitted evidence that was not objected to or stricken. People v. McGrath, 793 P.2d 664 (Colo. App. 1989); People v. Rhodus, 303 P.3d 109 (Colo. App. 2012).

➢ Discretion to

...