acting in conformity with closing argument was not so prejudicial as to deprive defendant of a fair trial — especially in light of the trial justice’s previous jury instruction on this point and defendant’s withdrawn objection to the evidence in question. As a result, we are convinced that the court’s error in failing to instruct the jury to disregard this argument does not require a new trial because, absent the prosecutor’s improper argument, it is clear to us beyond a reasonable doubt that the jury would have returned a guilty verdict anyway. See United States v. Hasting, 461 U.S. 499, 511-12, 103 S.Ct. 1974, 1982, 76 L.Ed.2d 96, 108 (1983) (applying harmless error analysis to prosecutor’s improper closing argument). See also In re Shannon B, 725 A.2d 893, 895 (R.I.1998) (<HOLDING>); State v. McKone, 673 A.2d 1068, 1075
holding error in admission of evidence is harmless when it was merely cumulative to other evidence in the record holding that admission of prior statement constituted error but was harmless when other admissible evidence established the same fact holding improper admission of hearsay evidence is reversible error only when the admission causes prejudice holding that a violation of the hearsay rule was harmless holding that admission of hearsay constituted harmless error when there was more than sufficient other evidence in the record to support the verdict