During closing arguments in appellant’s robbery trial, the prosecutor stated that she had taken an oath as a district attorney not to prosecute a case if she had any doubt that the crime occurred, and that the defendant charged here is the person who committed the crime. Following conviction, appellant contended on appeal that the prosecutor committed prejudicial misconduct by vouching for the integrity of her office and the victim, and that no objection and admonition would have cured the harm. The appellate court agreed and reversed the conviction. The prosecutor’s comments were prejudicial misconduct and an admonition would not have cured the harm. The evidence against appellant was not overwhelming, and the credibility of the eyewitness’s testimony was crucial to the case.