King v. State, 417 P.3d 657

Angel Elisabeth King was convicted by a jury of possession of child pornography (sexual exploitation of a child) and sentenced to 3–5 years (suspended) with five years probation; acquitted on two counts of accessory/abetting sexual abuse of her daughter, D.O.
D.O. testified that on a December 21, 2013 trip from Fort Collins just before her 14th birthday, King asked D.O. to take nude photos on King’s phone for King’s boyfriend, Clinton Woods; two nude photos of D.O. were recovered associated with King’s Google/Picasa account.
Detective Girany testified the photos were taken on a different phone in December 2013, backed up to Picasa cloud storage tied to an email account matching King’s, and later accessible on King’s phone when it was activated.
King testified she shared an email account across family phones, periodically reviewed her photo album, denied asking D.O. to take photos, and denied knowledge of the nude pictures.
In rebuttal closing the prosecutor articulated a detailed “State’s theory” (including that a protective mother might suggest the daughter join her and the boyfriend to make sex “safe”); defense objected as facts not in evidence and the court instructed jurors that attorney statements are not evidence.
King appealed claiming prosecutorial misconduct: the prosecutor argued a theory in rebuttal not supported by evidence. The Wyoming Supreme Court affirmed the conviction.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether prosecutor committed misconduct by arguing a theory not supported by evidence in rebuttal closing	King: prosecutor stated facts/inferences (mother suggesting daughter join sexual relationship to make it "safe") that were not in evidence and mischaracterized testimony	State: challenged remarks were reasonable inferences from D.O.'s testimony about the Fort Collins trip, argument concerned witness credibility and theory applicable to charged matters	Court: No misconduct; prosecutor's statements were supported by D.O.'s testimony and were permissible inferences; error not shown

Gonzalez-Ochoa v. State, 317 P.3d 599 (Wyo. 2014) (harmless error standard when prosecutorial misconduct objection made at trial)
Bustos v. State, 180 P.3d 904 (Wyo. 2008) (prosecutor may argue reasonable inferences from evidence; error if prosecutor intentionally misstates evidence)
Phillips v. State, 151 P.3d 1131 (Wyo. 2007) (context of entire closing argument considered for improper argument claims)
Hughes v. State, 658 P.2d 1294 (Wyo. 1983) (requirement to find error before applying harmless-error review)
Woods v. State, 401 P.3d 962 (Wyo. 2017) (related appellate decision affirming Woods' sexual-abuse convictions)