Garcia-Fregoso

MEMORANDUM **

The judgment of the district court is affirmed.

A. The Scope of Defense Counsel’s Closing Argument

“The trial court has broad discretion in controlling closing arguments, and, in the absence of an alleged violation of specific constitutional rights, we will apply *368 an abuse of discretion standard of review.” 1 We find no such abuse here. The fact that counsel’s statement regarding the “clear and convincing” standard of proof appears to have been legally accurate does not mean it had no potential to confuse or distract the jury, particularly where, as here, that is not the standard the jury was ultimately asked to apply. The propriety of this type of argument in any particular case is an issue the district courts are uniquely well positioned to decide and, thus, that we are particularly reluctant to second-guess.

B. Reasonable Doubt Instruction

In United States v. Velasquez, 2 we held that “use of the ‘firmly convinced’ language [does] not indicate to the jury that the prosecutor ha[s] a lesser burden than that implied by the use of the term ‘reasonable doubt’ standing alone” and that, therefore, it is not reversible error for the court to give that…