In a prosecution for robbery and grand larceny arising from the taking of a necklace, there was no error in the trial court's refusal to grant a new trial based upon comments made by the prosecuting attorney during closing arguments, which did not improperly express an opinion or comment upon the veracity of a witness - or the jury's function in assessing credibility - and thus did not deprive the defendant of fair trial. However, unsupported affidavits do not provide sufficient information to decide the claim that the defendant was deprived of his Sixth Amendment right to a fair trial when a friend and two family members were allegedly prohibited from entering the courtroom during the voir dire proceedings, and the case is remanded for an evidentiary hearing on that issue. Arguments regarding sufficiency of the evidence and identification of the defendant as the perpetrator of the crime were waived by failure to brief these issues on appeal as required by Virgin Islands Supreme Court Rule 22(a)(5). The judgment is affirmed in part and the case is remanded.
Supreme Court Of The Virgin Islands