crime based upon his bad character, as evidenced by his alleged gang membership. When a prosecutor “dwells on a defendant’s bad character” to argue that the defendant committed the crime or had the propensity to commit the crime, the prosecutor has engaged in misconduct. See Washington v. Hofbauer, 228 F.3d 689, 699 (6th Cir.2000). To be sure, the prosecutor’s final words to the jury were: “I don’t know anything about this gang stuff and I can be naive. That’s in this case. That’s what this case is about.” Yet the evidence indicated that the shooting concerned a domestic situation unrelated to gang activity. The prosecutor had no right to suggest that the shooting was gang-related when no evidence was presented to support his claim. See Berger, supra, 295 U.S. at 84-85, 55 S.Ct. 629 (<HOLDING>). Moreover, as discussed in detail supra,
holding it is improper for prosecutor to suggest that evidence which was not presented at trial provides additional grounds for finding the defendant guilty holding that statements to the jury made by the prosecutor asserting that a defense witness was lying was improper but considering all the facts and circumstances revealed in the record which showed overwhelming evidence against the defendant such statements did not constitute a prejudicial error holding that erroneous admission of improper and prejudicial evidence did not require reversal because the jury would have returned a verdict of guilty against the defendant even without the prejudicial testimony holding that it is improper for prosecutor to comment on accuseds postarrest silence holding that it is improper for a prosecutor to assume the existence of prejudicial facts not in evidence