Beasley v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Beasley v. State

927 So. 2d 1026, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 6691, 2006 WL 1168689

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided May 4, 2006·No. No. 1D04-3220·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

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).”).

KAHN, C.J., WOLF, and BENTON, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

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).”).

KAHN, C.J., WOLF, and BENTON, JJ., concur.

Beasley v. State, 927 So. 2d 1026, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 6691, 2006 WL 1168689 (Fla. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

927 So. 2d 1026 (Beasley v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related