Arrebola v. State
756 So. 2d 1107, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 5521, 2000 WL 561662
This text of 756 So. 2d 1107 (Arrebola v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Bluebook
Arrebola v. State, 756 So. 2d 1107, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 5521, 2000 WL 561662 (Fla. Ct. App. 2000).
Opinion
As we cannot conclude that the challenged remarks made by the state during its closing arguments in this trial were fundamentally erroneous as urged by the appellant, we affirm his conviction and sentence for burglary of an unoccupied structure. See McDonald v. State, 743 So.2d 501 (Fla.1999); Sandoval v. State, 689 So.2d 1258 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997).
Affirm.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
McDonald v. State
743 So. 2d 501 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1999)
Sandoval v. State
689 So. 2d 1258 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1997)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
756 So. 2d 1107, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 5521, 2000 WL 561662, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/arrebola-v-state-fladistctapp-2000.