and threatened sanctions pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 30(a) and 3rd Cir. LAR 303.3 such conduct). 2 See Trial Transcript Volume IV, 278-280. This is yet another example of Defendant's deliberate misrepresentations of fact, which is totally unacceptable. The Territorial Public Defender's Office has received prior admonishment from the appellate court that such misrepresentations may lead to sanctions. See Footnote 1, supra. 3 On the same evening of the Defendant's arrest, Malik Meyers was fatally shot, and George VanHolten was shot and wounded. At a pre-trial conference held on June 21,1994, the court ruled that no references to the death of Malik Meyers and the shooting of George VanHolten would be allowed during trial. 4 See also, Government v. Joseph, 770 F.2d 343 (3d Cir. 1985) (<HOLDING>). 5 John Weekes offered testimony that he
holding that a lower courts findings must be upheld if found to be plausible in light of the entire record even though the reviewing court would have weighed the evidence differently if it sat as the trier of fact recognizing that the defenses response argument at closing can ameliorate the improper prosecutorial comments recognizing that even if the prosecutor engaged in improper conduct we must reexamine the improper remark in light of the entire record to determine whether the remark deprived the defendant of a fair trial holding that alleged prosecutorial misconduct must be evaluated in light of the prosecutors argument and the entire record and if a review of the record convinces the court that the jury would have convicted defendant even if it were not exposed to the alleged improper prosecutorial comments then no actual prejudice occurred holding that claims alleging prosecutorial misconduct which were based on facts in the record could have and should have been raised on direct appeal and were thus not cognizable in postconviction proceedings