Breines v. State

462 So. 2d 831, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 50, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 16128
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided December 19, 1984·No. No. 83-1936·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinions

RIYKIND, LEONARD, Associate Judge.

Appellant was convicted of drug trafficking. We conclude from a careful examination of the entire record that a decidedly improper remark by the prosecutor in summation “[Y]ou don’t need fingerprints when you have got eyewitnesses ... and I could have brought in five others ...,” was harmless error because of the overwhelming evidence against appellant. See State v. Murray, 443 So.2d 955 (Fla.1984).

The remaining point on appeal concerns the validity of the Florida trafficking statute, § 893.135, Fla. Stat. (1981). It is constitutional. State v. Werner, 402 So.2d 386 (Fla.1981). State v. Benitez, 395 So.2d 514 (Fla.1981).

Affirmed.

HERSEY, J., concurs. LETTS, J., dissents with opinion.

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

Breines v. State, 462 So. 2d 831, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 50, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 16128 (Fla. Ct. App. 1984).

462 So. 2d 831 (Breines v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Smith
554 So. 2d 676 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1989)
Llida v. State
501 So. 2d 162 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1987)