State v. Curtis

The defendant was tried and convicted of driving while under the influence of intoxicating liquor in violation of 23 V.S.A. § 1201 (a) (2). He seeks reversal of his conviction because of claimed prejudicial statements by the state’s attorney during the closing argument. We affirm.

The defendant made no objection during argument to the statements now complained of. He did make a series of objections to the statements at the bench following argument and asked the court “to give what curative instructions it could.” The court then instructed the jurors that they were the sole determiners of the…