☢ test - Í

Agee v. State, 279 Ga. 774, 621 S.E.2d 434 (October 24, 2005). Trial court erred in limiting closing arguments to one hour per side in defendant’s murder trial, but defendant waived error by failing to object, and error harmless in light of overwhelming evidence of defendant’s guilt, as “Agee’s right was not denied completely.” “OCGA § 17-8-73 provides that closing arguments in a capital felony case are to be limited to two hours for each side. This Code section applies to malice murder and felony murder cases regardless of whether the prosecution seeks the death penalty. Chapman v. State, 273 Ga. 865, 869(3), 548 S.E.2d 278 (2001). ‘The trial court has no discretion to impose any further limit on the time for closing argument, and failure to afford the parties the full time is, as a matter of law, error. Hayes v. State, 268 Ga. 809, 813(7), 493 S.E.2d 169 (1997).’ Chapman, supra. “In this case, prior to closing arguments, the trial court stated: ‘It’s an hour per side. I'll tell you at ten and then at five.’ Thus, the trial court gave notice to both the prosecutor and defense counsel that closing arguments would be limited to one hour, instead of two. Defense counsel did not insist upon his right to the full time; instead, he remained silent. Thus, defense counsel acquiesced in the court’s ruling and waived this issue on appeal .” Accord, In re: E.J., 283 Ga. App. 541, 642 S.E.2d 179 (February 9, 2007) (trial court’s abridgment of closing argument waived where not objected to at trial); Johnson (May 24, 2011), above. Hendricks v. State, 277 Ga. 61, 586 S.E.2d 317 (September 15, 2003). “A presumption of harm requiring the grant of a new trial accompanies the abridgement of the right to make a closing argument, and the presumption is overcome ‘when the denial of the right is not complete and only in those extreme cases in which the evidence of a defendant’s guilt is so overwhelming that it renders any other version of events virtually without belief.’” Defendant’s murder conviction reversed and remanded. Accord, Palma v. State , 280 Ga. 108, 624 S.E.2d 137 (December 8, 2005) (murder conviction reversed; defense counsel improperly prohibited from arguing benefit of plea bargains given to State’s witnesses). Laster v. State, 276 Ga. 645, 581 S.E.2d 522 (June 2, 2003). “‘The right to make a closing argument to the jury is an important one, and abridgment of this right is not to be tolerated. Harm, requiring that a defendant be given a new trial, is presumed when the right is erroneously denied, and the presumption of harm, although not absolute, is not readily overcome.’ However, this presumption of harm will not stand when the denial of the right is not complete and when the evidence of a defendant’s guilt is overwhelming so as to render any other version of events virtually without belief.” Reversible error where defendant given only half of time to which he was entitled, and evidence of guilt was not overwhelming. Monroe v. State , 272 Ga. 201, 528 S.E.2d 504 (March 13, 2000). Malice murder and related convictions affirmed; trial court erred, but harmless, in abridging closing argument to one hour instead of two. “At the time of appellant's trial, Uniform Superior Court Rule 13.1 limited closing argument in a ‘capital felony case in which the death penalty is sought’ to two hours and to one hour in ‘any other felony case,’ [fn: Effective September 2, 1999, USCR 13.1 was amended to provide for two-hour closing arguments in ‘[f]elony cases punishable by the death penalty or life in prison....’] and OCGA § 17-8-73 provided that counsel in a non-capital felony case was limited to one hour for closing argument, and to two hours in a capital felony case. In Hayes v. State, 268 Ga. 809(7), 493 S.E.2d 169 (1997), decided seven months before appellant's trial, this Court construed ‘capital felony’ as used in § 17-8-73 to include those cases in which the defendant was being tried for murder without the death penalty being sought, and concluded that the trial court in Hayes erred as a matter of law when it restricted the defendants' closing arguments to less than the two hours to which they were statutorily entitled. See also Massey v. State, 270 Ga. 76(3), 508 S.E.2d 149 (1998). Thus, the trial court in the case at bar also erred as a matter of law when it did not treat appellant's malice murder trial as one involving a capital felony under OCGA § 17- 8-73 and did not give appellant the two-hour limit on closing argument to which he was statutorily entitled.” Anderson v. State, 236 Ga.App. 679, 513 S.E.2d 235 (February 26, 1999). Trial court committed harmless error “in restricting defendant’s closing argument so as to prohibit him from commenting on the prosecution’s failure to produce certain witnesses. Morgan v. State, 267 Ga. 203, 476 S.E.2d 747 (1996); Smith v. State, 231 Ga.App. 68, 70(2), 498 S.E.2d 561 (1998). Evidence was presented that another female named ‘Stacey’ was present when defendant committed the armed robberies and aggravated assault of which he was convicted and that the prosecution did not call this witness at trial. Nonetheless, defendant has not shown that he was prejudiced by the denial of the opportunity for his counsel to comment on the prosecution’s failure to call ‘Stacey’ as a witness. The trial evidence controverts any argument that ‘Stacey’ would have given exculpatory testimony since it was she who informed victim Williams of defendant’s name after apparently recognizing him during the crimes. Under these circumstances, defendant has failed to show the requisite harm to reverse a conviction. [Cits.]” 2. ARGUMENT AFTER RE-CHARGE