The Court failed to recognize o
r address Appellant’s constitutional claims.
Instead, the Court focused most of its analysis
on the “Deadly Weapon”
s brief clearly states is not the basis for this appeal. (Reply Brief,pg. 3-4, 17-18)
of Constitutional Claims
The erroneous methodologies used by the Court to summarily reject the
constitutional claims include the following:1. Separating the
components of the prosecutor’s strategy
into separate events andanalyzing each event separately, instead of as part of the strategy.2. After viewing each component
separately, concluding that Appellant’
s brief violated
TRAP 38.1(i); that Appellant’s
brief fails to present anything for review.
3. Failing to consider the prosecutor’s admission
s of vindictiveness as evidence
that the prosecutor’s misconduct during trial was intentional.
4. Relying on arguments and authorities that are not applicable when a prosecutorintentionally inflames and prejudices the jury against a defendant.5. Failing to recognize that before cross-examination of Appellant, the crucial issuefor the jury was whether Appellant was arrogant and uncooperative on the dark highway OR whether she was afraid, when she tried to go to a safer place.