State v. Gordon, ___ N.C. App. ___, 789 S.E.2d. 659 (Jul. 19, 2016)

(1) The prosecutor’s statement, which was clarified after objection, was not in violation of the law or calculated to mislead or prejudice the jury. After the trial court sustained defense counsel’s objection to the prosecutor’s statement about the victim, “I think she is telling the truth,” the prosecutor clarified: “I’m just arguing they should think she’s telling the truth. I’m sorry, Judge, I misstated. You should be able to say, after watching her testify, that you think she is telling the truth.” (2) The court rejected the defendant’s argument that the trial court erred by failing to give a curative instruction to the jury after sustaining defense counsel’s objection, where the defendant had not asked for such an instruction. Additionally, the trial court had instructed the jury at the outset of the trial that when the court sustains an objection to a question, the jury must disregard the question and e answer. (3) The trial court did not err by failing to intervene ex mero motu when the prosecutor made his clarifying statement.