Crews v. State
This text of 589 So. 2d 468 (Crews 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
Defendant appeals his conviction and sentence on the ground of prosecutorial misconduct during closing arguments. We hold that these remarks do not rise to the level of prejudice necessary to warrant a new trial. See Breedlove v. State, 413 So.2d 1 (Fla.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 882, 103 S.Ct. 184, 74 L.Ed.2d 149 (1982); State v. Murray, 443 So.2d 955, 956 (Fla.1984) (error does not warrant reversal unless it was “so prejudicial as to vitiate the entire trial”). Compare Alvarez v. State, 574 So.2d 1119 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991) (egregious comments made throughout the State’s closing argument required reversal).
We find no merit m the other issues raised on appeal.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
589 So. 2d 468, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 11995, 1991 WL 253829, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/crews-v-state-fladistctapp-1991.