Kleinbard v. State

208 So. 2d 127, 1968 Fla. App. LEXIS 5716
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided March 12, 1968·No. No. 67-232·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellant was convicted of (1) possession of barbiturates and (2) using a false address to obtain barbiturates contrary to the provisions of § 404.02, Fla. Stat., F.S.A. The appellant presents two points. The first urges that the State failed to establish a primia facie case because it did not prove affirmatively that appellant obtained the drugs with criminal intent. Without deciding-the question of whether this particular statute requires scienter as a necessary element of the crime [see Coleman v. State ex rel. Jackson, 140 Fla. 772, 193 So. 84 (1940)], we hold that the evidence showed the giving of a false address where appellant did not live and never had lived and this, along with other testimony, established that the appellant knowingly gave a false address.

Appellant’s second point urges that he was denied the right of closing argument. This position has been repeatedly dealt with by the courts of this State who have held that unless the appellant requests closing argument, or objects to its omission, no error is shown. Willoughby v. State, Fla.App.1967, 203 So.2d 10, cf. State v. Jones, Fla.1967, 204 So.2d 515.

Affirmed.

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

Kleinbard v. State, 208 So. 2d 127, 1968 Fla. App. LEXIS 5716 (Fla. Ct. App. 1968).

208 So. 2d 127 (Kleinbard v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Sutterby
34 Fla. Supp. 22 (Brevard County Court, 1969)