McCalister v. State

682 So. 2d 556, 21 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 492, 1996 Fla. LEXIS 1872, 1996 WL 648182
Supreme Court of Florida·Decided November 7, 1996·No. No. 87238·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We have for review McCalister v. State, 664 So.2d 1149 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995), which expressly and directly conflicts with the opinion in Montague v. State, 656 So.2d 508 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995). We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const.

We recently quashed the decision in Montague and held that a contemporaneous objection is necessary to preserve a Karchesky error for appellate review. State v. Montague, 682 So.2d 1085 (Fla.1996). Therefore, we approve the decision below.

It is so ordered.

KOGAN, C.J., and OVERTON, SHAW, GRIMES, HARDING, WELLS and ANSTEAD, JJ., concur.

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

McCalister v. State, 682 So. 2d 556, 21 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 492, 1996 Fla. LEXIS 1872, 1996 WL 648182 (Fla. 1996).

682 So. 2d 556 (McCalister v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

McCalister v. State
664 So. 2d 1149 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1995)
State v. Montague
682 So. 2d 1085 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1996)
Montague v. State
656 So. 2d 508 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1995)