a new trial because the prosecutor violated OCGA § 17-8-76 during her closing argument.* * Near the end of the State’s rebuttal closing argument, the prosecutor suggested that Cowart could be paroled if the jury convicted him. After the prosecutor completed her argument about a minute later, the jury left the courtroom. Cowart then objected to the prosecutor’s argument and asked the court to either bring the jury back for the prosecutor to correct her statement that “life doesn’t mean life” or grant a mistrial. The court summarily denied those requests. Cowart’s objection and motion for mistrial, made after the prosecutor’s closing argument ended, were not timely, and he therefore failed to preserve this issue for appeal. See Butler v. State, 273 Ga. 380, 383-384 (541 SE2d 653) (2001) (<HOLDING>); Mullins v. Thompson, 274 Ga. 366, 367 (553
holding that the objection had been sufficiently timely when the defense waited until the governments rebuttal to object to a statement made during the governments closing statement holding that the defendants objection was untimely when he waited until the end of the prosecutors closing argument to raise it holding that motion for mistrial was untimely where defendant waited two or three minutes after the objectionable testimony occurred to make objection holding that notice was untimely where the attorney waited to establish the lien until approximately two months after the case concluded holding that the defendants objection was untimely and thus waived because the evidence to which he objected had already been presented to the jury