Marulanda v. State

463 So. 2d 1224, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 423, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 12355
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedFebruary 12, 1985
DocketNo. 84-403
StatusPublished

This text of 463 So. 2d 1224 (Marulanda 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
Marulanda v. State, 463 So. 2d 1224, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 423, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 12355 (Fla. Ct. App. 1985).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The defendant appeals from a judgment of conviction and sentence for trafficking in cocaine; possession with intent to sell, manufacture or deliver cocaine; and carrying a concealed firearm.

It is contended by the defendant on appeal that the trial court erred in denying his motion for a judgment of acquittal, and in admitting hearsay testimony under the co-conspirator exception, and furthermore, [1225]*1225that certain remarks of the prosecutor made in the closing argument to the jury were so prejudicial that defendant was denied a fair and impartial trial.

We have carefully considered these contentions in the light of the record, briefs and argument of counsel and have concluded that no reversible error has been demonstrated. Tibbs v. State, 397 So.2d 1120 (Fla.1981), aff'd, 457 U.S. 31, 102 S.Ct. 2211, 72 L.Ed.2d 652, (1982); Lynch v. State, 293 So.2d 44 (Fla.1974); Muwwakil v. State, 435 So.2d 304 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983), pet. for rev. denied, 444 So.2d 417 (Fla. 1984); Tresvant v. State, 396 So.2d 733 (Fla. 3d DCA), pet. for rev. denied, 408 So.2d 1096 (Fla.1981); Lynn v. State, 395 So.2d 621 (Fla. 1st DCA), pet. for rev. denied, 402 So.2d 611 (Fla.1981); Boyd v. State, 389 So.2d 642 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980); Ragin v. State, 348 So.2d 923 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977).

However, as to the judgment of conviction and sentence entered upon the count charging the defendant with possession of cocaine, we are compelled to reverse upon the authority of Bell v. State, 437 So.2d 1057 (Fla.1983). Reyes v. State, 462 So.2d 1198 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985).

Affirmed in part and reversed in part.

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

Related

Tibbs v. Florida
457 U.S. 31 (Supreme Court, 1982)
Bell v. State
437 So. 2d 1057 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1983)
Boyd v. State
389 So. 2d 642 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1980)
Lynn v. State
395 So. 2d 621 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1981)
Muwwakil v. State
435 So. 2d 304 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1983)
Tibbs v. State
397 So. 2d 1120 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1981)
Tresvant v. State
396 So. 2d 733 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1981)
Lynch v. State
293 So. 2d 44 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1974)
Ragin v. State
348 So. 2d 923 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1977)
Reyes v. State
462 So. 2d 1198 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1985)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
463 So. 2d 1224, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 423, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 12355, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/marulanda-v-state-fladistctapp-1985.