The California Supreme Court recently ruled a prosecutor’s use of a Power Point presentation depicting a jigsaw puzzle of the Statue of Liberty to define  reasonable doubt constituted prosecutorial misconduct.

In the case at issue, the Defendant was convicted of domestic violence under  Penal Code Section 273.5 with a prison prior.  He was sentenced to four years in state prison.  On appeal, the Defendant argued the Power Point presentation used during the prosecutor’s closing argument to exemplify the  reasonable doubt standard was improper and urged the jury to conclude “where there’s smoke there’s fire.”  

As explained in the decision, the visual presentation showed six pieces of an eight piece puzzle being assembled piece by piece on the screen which was “immediately and easily recognizable as the Statue of Liberty.”  Before finally adding the last two pieces, the prosecutor noted “we know this picture is beyond a reasonable doubt without looking at all the pieces of that picture.  We know that that’s a picture of the Statue of Liberty, we don’t need all the pieces of it.” 

The Court found this to be clear misstatement of the law which served to lessen the reasonable doubt standard required under the  Constitution to one which “invites the jurors to guess or jump to a conclusion.”  

Despite this finding, the Court found the presentation did not prejudice the Defendant given the facts in this particular case and, thus, affirmed the judgment.  They did, however, offer this warning: “Nevertheless, we caution prosecutors who are tempted to enliven closing argument with visual aids that using such aids to illustrate the “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard is dangerous and unwise.”