Kirtsey v. State of Florida
649 So. 2d 946, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 1316, 1995 WL 59580
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided February 15, 1995·No. No. 94-2078·Published·Cited by 3 cases
Opinion
Although the opening of the prosecutor’s final argument1 was improper, see Baker v. State, 578 So.2d 37, 39 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991); Salazar-Rodriguez v. State, 436 So.2d 269 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983), and the objection to it was incorrectly overruled, we are convinced that the error was harmless2. State, v. DiGuilio, 491 So.2d 1129 (Fla.1986); State v. Murray, 443 So.2d 955 (Fla.1984); Hall v. State, 444 So.2d 1019 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984).
Affirmed.
Footnotes
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Kirtsey v. State of Florida, 649 So. 2d 946, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 1316, 1995 WL 59580 (Fla. Ct. App. 1995).
649 So. 2d 946 (Kirtsey v. State of Florida) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Lucas v. State
67 So. 3d 332 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2011)
Jackson v. State
704 So. 2d 220 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1998)
Sandoval v. State
689 So. 2d 1258 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1997)