☢ test - Í

Collins v. State, 283 Ga.App. 188, 641 S.E.2d 208 (January 5, 2007). “[T]he prosecutor argued to the jury: ‘Let’s set the standard in our community that this is not tolerated. This is not how a woman is going to be treated in our community.’ The prosecutor’s argument was not improper under Georgia law. We have held that ‘closing argument references to what message a “not guilty” verdict would send to the community regarding safety or principles of right and wrong are permissible forms of argument’ and that ‘[a] prosecutor may appeal to the jury to convict for the safety of the community or to send a message to others that criminal activities will be punished.’ (Footnotes and punctuation omitted.) Green v. State, 244 Ga.App. 697, 698(2) (536 S.E.2d 565) (2000). See also McKibbons v. State, 216 Ga.App. 389, 392- 393(4) (455 S.E.2d 293) (1995); Johnson v. State, 187 Ga.App. 803, 804(4) (371 S.E.2d 419) (1988). The prosecutor’s ‘community standard’ argument was substantially similar to this line of Georgia cases.” Accord, Mathis v. State , 298 Ga.App. 817, 681 S.E.2d 179 (June 18, 2009); Wright v. State , 319 Ga.App. 723, 738 S.E.2d 310 (February 11, 2013). Nelson v. State, 278 Ga.App. 548, 629 S.E.2d 410 (February 28, 2006). Defendant objects to this argument by prosecutor: “Jury service is unique in that it actually puts crime directly in your hands. Some of you here may serve on a neighborhood watch, you may serve on a PTA ... and those things are huge, but those things don’t give you the ability to directly affect crime the way jury service does and for some of you this may be your only opportunity in your life to do so. As a community, as a country, we preach to people about stopping silence [sic]. Here’s your chance.” Held, this argument was not improper. “Prosecutors are afforded considerable latitude in impressing the jury by using imagery and illustration to impart to the jury its responsibility to enforce the law. See Philmore v. State, 263 Ga. 67, 69(3) (428 S.E.2d 329) (1993). Exhorting jurors to serve the greater community or appealing to jurors to have an impact on crime in general are not impermissible requests.” Shaw v. State, 265 Ga.App. 451, 594 S.E.2d 393 (February 5, 2004). Prosecutor’s argument that “[t]he citizens of Hall County desire to be free of drugs, desire to be free of crack cocaine distribution on our streets, that same crack cocaine that’s destroying so many people. We saw Mr. Harvey on the stand. We have several Mr. Harveys in our society. And those same people [who] have succumb[ed] to the grips of drugs and drug addiction. There were some of you [who] also said you had people in your family who were addicted to drugs. And it is ... the desire for Hall County to be free of that. If you find the defendant ... guilty, Hall County citizens can take the first step toward being free of drugs…” not a “golden rule” argument, but rather an “appeal to the jury to convict for the safety of the community.” Close, though: “[A]ny argument, regardless of nomenclature, which importunes the jury to place itself in the position of the victim for any purpose must be carefully scrutinized. [Cit.]” Accord, Navarro v. State , 279 Ga.App. 311, 630 S.E.2d 893 (May 11, 2006); Tucker (January 12, 2012), above. Putman v. State, 257 Ga.App. 902, 572 S.E.2d 412 (October 11, 2002). “Prior to a jury’s guilty/innocence determination, it is not improper for the State to argue that failure to convict on the indicted offense is giving a defendant a ‘free pass.’ ‘[I]t is not improper for a prosecutor to appeal to the jury to convict for the safety of the community, or to stress the need for enforcement of the laws and to impress on the jury its responsibility in that regard.’” Davis v. State, 253 Ga.App. 803, 560 S.E.2d 711 (February 19, 2002). “It is not improper for the prosecutor to appeal to the jury to convict for the safety of the community or to convict to stem a problem of violence in the community. Nor is it improper for the prosecutor to impress upon the jury its responsibility to enforce the law.” Accord, Jenkins v. State , 281 Ga. 24, 635 S.E.2d 714 (October 2, 2006). Green v. State, 244 Ga.App. 697, 536 S.E.2d 565 (June 29, 2000). Aggravated assault conviction affirmed; “the prosecutor's closing argument that a ‘not guilty’ verdict would send the wrong message to the community is permissible argument.” Prosecutor here argued “that a ‘not guilty’ verdict would send a message to the community that insults alone justified the offended person shooting the insulter. But closing argument references to what message a ‘not guilty’ verdict would send to the community regarding safety or principles of right and wrong are permissible forms of argument. Thomas v. State, 268 Ga. 135, 140(14), 485 S.E.2d 783 (1997). ‘A prosecutor may appeal to the jury to convict for the safety of the community or to send a message to others that criminal activities will be punished.’ (Citations omitted.) McClain v. State, 267 Ga. 378, 385(4)(a), 477 S.E.2d 814 (1996); accord Philmore v. State, 263 Ga. 67, 69(3), 428 S.E.2d 329 (1993).” Green v. State, 244 Ga.App. 697, 536 S.E.2d 565 (June 29, 2000). A prosecutor may appeal to the jury to convict for the safety of the community or to send a message to others that criminal activities will be punished. Accord, Price v. State , 280 Ga. 193, 625 S.E.2d 397 (January 17, 2006); Haggins v. State , 277 Ga.App. 742, 627 S.E.2d 448 (February 24, 2006) (comments made in opening statement); Pressley v. State , 331 Ga.App. 175, 770 S.E.2d 266 (March 16, 2015) (argument