Mendez v. State

Supreme Court of Florida

Mendez v. State

39 So. 2d 468, 1949 Fla. LEXIS 1295

CourtSupreme Court of Florida

DecidedFebruary 22, 1949

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 39 So. 2d 468 (Mendez v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Mendez v. State, 39 So. 2d 468, 1949 Fla. LEXIS 1295 (Fla. 1949).

Pincite

Opinion

Aristides P. Mendez was convicted of breaking and entering an automobile with intent to commit grand larceny, and he appeals.

Affirmed. This appeal is from a conviction of breaking and entering an automobile with intent to commit grand larceny.

The first claim for reversal is that the state's evidence is circumstantial and insufficient. We have reviewed the evidence and find it sufficient to support the jury's verdict.

The second ground of attack is directed to an assertion that inflammatory remarks were made to the jury in the closing argument by the state attorney. On this we also must hold against the appellant. The remarks, if made, were not objected to at the time and thereby afforded the trial court no opportunity to rule upon the objection or otherwise right the wrong. Furthermore, the remarks have not been duly and properly authenticated to this Court by the trial court.

Finding no error the judgment is affirmed.

ADAMS, C.J., and TERRELL, SEBRING, and BARNS, JJ., concur.

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