Whether the trial court erred in allowing certain evidence to be introduced and considered as testimony, as well as issues brought up during closing arguments

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED \. Wid the tral Ceurk Bur m alblowrng enchare oh CY mes Net Conterno, 10 the tn fermaten, tube mtroduced ana Sferlichted as FeSFimery 7 AS we ll Gs buns brou ht up ago dAureng Closing Ov guments? A. Were He frosceytes improper clasirig, arguments Wh germisSable jana Ach Hey shift He borden of Vigo +e pte petetene ? 7 Ded He tral dye abuse bis Ascretecr whey he Aone vee Cavs challenges whith all beck Sig beat é en Gukrcant euscne, 4. Wes dhe $tatence. Vindictne beause. tHe pede brener vent bey Ayial% A check pet ves net Conveyerk te He fperrbure of Fmuemnths en Comnty Was chheree , teHonedd by a Glen a barse.” Aerl ef dyears beAve treal Commenced, fetyhevebens JealeacecA te Gyears utter He tra zd Wes net Pperly nfermed bray Aéa| I. Chzuls Aa 10 Sbeuctren de melohe alegser chars 2. have_ yi dv (2 lg, Was 6 fom of Cumelatrve EMS reached Poting He Oval y With anedter Lutborst ly He Prosecutor panct his mprepes borden shPhwrs Comment, Aid rh ameunt in «a findamertel CWE, infroagmag or Fe petdeomer’s hight te a fev ane apa tiod MS os Vable of Conten Didex of Appendices 3 Teble ot Avther Kes aa Petron for Wndet Cerdioran’ q oO pin tong Delow saT Stetement of Juri sdichion 7 Censhtuboneal and $ beduteory Prustens Invpluel 4 . Sfedement-ot the Ces e 1-8 Qeasens fer grant ng the wit lors” Cenclysion 1S” oy, Appendiv A Fla 5% cA decision 5