Portuondo v. Agard, 529 U.S. 61, 28 (2000)

Page:   Index   Previous  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28

88

PORTUONDO v. AGARD

Ginsburg, J., dissenting

* * *

In the end, we are left with a prosecutorial practice that burdens the constitutional rights of defendants, that cannot be justified by reference to the trial's aim of sorting guilty defendants from innocent ones, and that is not supported by our case law. The restriction that the Court of Appeals placed on generic accusations of tailoring is both moderate and warranted. That court declared it permissible for the prosecutor to comment on "what the defendant testified to regarding pertinent events"—"the fit between the testimony of the defendant and other witnesses." 159 F. 3d, at 99. What is impermissible, the Second Circuit held, is simply and only a summation "bolstering . . . the prosecution witnesses' credibility vis-a-vis the defendant's based solely on the defendant's exercise of a constitutional right to be present during the trial." Ibid. I would affirm that sound judgment and therefore dissent from the Court's disposition.

Page:   Index   Previous  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28

Last modified: October 4, 2007