Crittendon v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Crittendon v. State

681 So. 2d 920, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 11389, 1996 WL 625522

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 30, 1996

DocketNo. 95-2888

StatusPublished

This text of 681 So. 2d 920 (Crittendon 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

Crittendon v. State, 681 So. 2d 920, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 11389, 1996 WL 625522 (Fla. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We reverse the appellant’s conviction because we are unable to say that the prosecutor’s improper comment upon the appellant’s post-arrest silence was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. See State v. DiGuilio, 491 So.2d 1129 (Fla.1986); Sharp v. State, 605 So.2d 146, (Fla. 1st DCA 1992); Fundora v. State, 634 So.2d 255 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994); J.D. v. State, 553 So.2d 1317 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Wood v. State, 552 So.2d 235 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989); Nixon v. State, 536 So.2d 391 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989); Hosper v. State, 513 So.2d 234 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987). The other arguments presented by the appellant are without merit or are rendered moot by the disposition.

The conviction is reversed and the case is remanded.

ALLEN, WEBSTER and MICKLE, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We reverse the appellant’s conviction because we are unable to say that the prosecutor’s improper comment upon the appellant’s post-arrest silence was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. See State v. DiGuilio, 491 So.2d 1129 (Fla.1986); Sharp v. State, 605 So.2d 146, (Fla. 1st DCA 1992); Fundora v. State, 634 So.2d 255 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994); J.D. v. State, 553 So.2d 1317 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Wood v. State, 552 So.2d 235 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989); Nixon v. State, 536 So.2d 391 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989); Hosper v. State, 513 So.2d 234 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987). The other arguments presented by the appellant are without merit or are rendered moot by the disposition.

The conviction is reversed and the case is remanded.

ALLEN, WEBSTER and MICKLE, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

681 So. 2d 920, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 11389, 1996 WL 625522, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/crittendon-v-state-fladistctapp-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack