Baist v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Baist v. State

696 So. 2d 1212, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 5590, 1997 WL 269326

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 21, 1997

DocketNo. 96-234

StatusPublished

This text of 696 So. 2d 1212 (Baist 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

Baist v. State, 696 So. 2d 1212, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 5590, 1997 WL 269326 (Fla. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Jerrie MacDonald Bell Baist appeals her conviction of first degree murder. We affirm.

First, defendant-appellant Baist maintains that the State made improper closing arguments. Most of the complained-of arguments were not objected to, and appear to be proper comments on the evidence in the case. If there was any objectionable argument at all, there is certainly none which rises to the level necessary to constitute fundamental error. With regard to the arguments which were objected to, we find no error in the trial court’s rulings.

Second, defendant contends that the trial court erroneously excluded the videotape of her hypnotic regression session with her psy-chiatnc expert. The psychotherapist was allowed to testify fully but the videotape was excluded. We conclude that this ruling was in accordance with Jackson v. State, 648 So.2d 85, 90-91 (Fla.1994).

The remaining issues are without merit.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI