How have the courts treated the presumption of innocence?

Defendant next asserts that the prosecutor improperly told the jury during argument that the presumption of innocence does not apply during jury deliberations. He points to the prosecutor's argument that the presumption of innocence only lasts until the contrary is proven, and that it does not last for any particular and specified time during deliberations, but only lasts until the juror believes that guilt has been adequately proved. The prosecutor noted, by way of example, that while the presumption of innocence goes with the jurors into the deliberation room it does not automatically last while they talk it over "for four hours." This was a concrete example of demonstrating that there is no preset time period, such as "four hours," within which the presumption of innocence prevails. Rather, it only lasts until and unless guilt is adequately proven. Such argument is proper and in no way constitutes misconduct. (See People v. Goldberg (1984) 161 Cal.App.3d 170, 189-190.)

3.Arguing Factual Matters Not Supported By Evidence