N.W.2d 500, 509 (Minn.2005). We review improper prosecutorial statements under a harmless-error standard. Id. Mogler asserts that the county attorney committed prosecutorial misconduct in closing argument by saying that a police officer is always in a position of authority. We first note that Mogler did not object to the statements that he now contests. Although Mogler made a pretrial motion to preclude the state from arguing that a police officer is always in a position of authority, and the court denied it, he did not renew his objection during the closing argument to provide the court an opportunity to cure any erroneous statements. When a party has failed to object, we may review the claim depending on the gravity of the error. See State v. Powers, 654 N.W.2d 667, 678 (Minn.2003) (<HOLDING>). We will not grant a new trial if the
holding that although a defendant filed a motion in limine on an evidentiary issue a failure to object to the evidence at trial waives the issue for appeal holding that defendant forfeits right to have issue considered on appeal when he fails to object to misconduct at trial holding that a defendant who fails to object to trial error forfeits his right to appellate review unless he can establish fundamental error holding that the defendant waived the issue on appeal when he failed to contemporaneously object to the admission of such evidence at trial holding that an issue not presented to the trial court will not be considered on appeal