Beasley v. State
This text of 927 So. 2d 1026 (Beasley 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.
Opinion
AFFIRMED. See King v. State, 628 So.2d 486, 488 (Fla.1993); Taylor v. State, 640 So.2d 1127, 1133 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994) (“Improper prosecutorial comment is subject to a harmless error analysis, and will give rise to reversal of a conviction only if the comment is so prejudicial that it vitiates the entire trial.”). See also Proctor v. State, 901 So.2d 994, 995 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005) (“[Tjhis court would not be able to address the [scrivener’s] errors because, absent the trial court’s ruling on a rule 3.800(b)(2) motion, these errors were not preserved. See Brannon v. State, 850 So.2d 452, 456 (Fla.2003).”).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
927 So. 2d 1026, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 6691, 2006 WL 1168689, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/beasley-v-state-fladistctapp-2006.