Arthur Louis Martinez, Petitioner v. the People of the State of Colorado, Respondent

Summary

The court held that Martinez’s general objections preserved only a claim that the prosecutor’s closing argument was improper, not an argument under the Colorado Constitution. It ruled that generic tailoring arguments based solely on a defendant’s presence at trial are improper, but held the error harmless because the record contained substantial evidence bearing on Martinez’s credibility and no reasonable probability that the argument affected the verdict. Justice EID, concurring in part and in the judgment in part, agreed on preservation but would not require prosecutors to identify particular instances of tailoring to make a permissible tailoring argument.