discussed Cited "see" United States v. John M. Hamilton, Also Known as John Nordquist Accord United States v. Reed, 2 F.3d 1441, 1451 (7th Cir.1993), cert. denied, 114 S.Ct. 898 (1994); Olson v. United States, 989 F.2d 229, 231 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 114 S.Ct. 258 (1993); United States v. Reed, 986 F.2d 191, 192-93 (7th Cir.1993); United States v. Mazzanti, 925 F.2d 1026 , 1029 & n. 2 (7th Cir.1991). 3 The government contends that the Larrison test is applicable here because Hamilton bases his claim upon inconsistencies in testimony that Wildman presented at Hamilton's February 1993 trial and at a September 1994 evidentiary hearing on Wildman's own § 2255 motion. 24 We need…

discussed Cited "see, e.g." United States v. Dean William Cotnam and Phillip Zadurski See, e.g., United States v. Reed, 2 F.3d 1441, 1449-50 (7th Cir.1993), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 114 S.Ct. 898 , 127 L.Ed.2d 90 (1994); United States v. Osuorji, 32 F.3d 1186, 1191 (7th Cir. 1994), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 115 S.Ct. 919 , 130 L.Ed.2d 799 (1995).

discussed Cited "see, e.g." Albert Holiday v. Jerry D. Gilmore We look to five factors when weighing the propriety of a prosecutor's comment: 9 1) the nature and seriousness of the prosecutorial misconduct, 2) whether the prosecutor's statements were invited by conduct of defense counsel, 3) whether the trial court instructions to the jury were adequate, 4) whether the defense was able to counter the improper arguments through rebuttal, and 5) the weight of the evidence against the defendant. 10 United States v. Badger, 983 F.2d 1443, 1450-51 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 113 S.Ct. 2391 (1993); see also United States v. Reid, 2 F.3d 1441 (7th Cir.1993), cert.…