State v. Almaguer, 472 P.3d 326

Victim returned late to a friend’s home where Almaguer (the friend’s husband) was present; she lay on the couch to avoid waking her children. She testified Almaguer first groped her, left, then returned and raped her while she pretended to be asleep.
Victim reported the assault the same day; a nurse found sperm on her cervix matching Almaguer’s DNA.
Almaguer initially denied knowing Victim to police, but at trial said they exchanged sex for meth and that any sexual contact was consensual or limited to oral sex and ejaculation on her hand.
The prosecution attacked Almaguer’s credibility in closing, calling him a liar and accusing him of perjury with graphic commentary.
The trial court sua sponte gave a curative instruction: lawyers’ statements are not evidence, jurors must assess credibility, and the jury must disregard the prosecutor’s perjury accusation.
Jury convicted Almaguer of first‑degree rape; on appeal he contended prosecutorial misconduct and sought plain‑error review because he did not object at trial. The Court of Appeals affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether prosecutor’s closing‑argument accusation that defendant perjured himself required reversal for prosecutorial misconduct	Prosecutor: arguing defendant lied was a permissible inference from the evidence and fair comment on credibility	Almaguer: prosecutor improperly accused him of perjury and used prejudicial, graphic rhetorical attacks that deprived him of a fair trial	Court: No plain error—trial court promptly and explicitly cured the misconduct; defendant failed to show the court’s response was an obvious error or that he suffered prejudice

State v. Holgate, 10 P.3d 346 (Utah 2000) (plain error test)
State v. Todd, 173 P.3d 170 (Utah Ct. App. 2007) (review of prosecutorial misconduct and deference to trial court remedial decisions)
State v. Hummel, 393 P.3d 314 (Utah 2017) (plain‑error analysis focuses on obviousness of district court error in response to counsel missteps)
State v. Thompson, 318 P.3d 1221 (Utah Ct. App. 2014) (credibility attacks analyzed by whether comments are fair inferences from the evidence)
State v. Davis, 311 P.3d 538 (Utah Ct. App. 2013) (limits on asking trial court to disregard witness testimony absent proper preservation)
Taylor v. State, 156 P.3d 739 (Utah 2007) (presumption that jurors follow curative instructions)
State v. Wright, 304 P.3d 887 (Utah Ct. App. 2013) (same presumption regarding effectiveness of jury instructions)