Mitchell v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Mitchell v. State

433 So. 2d 68

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 22, 1983

DocketNo. 82-2619

StatusPublished

This text of 433 So. 2d 68 (Mitchell 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

Mitchell v. State, 433 So. 2d 68 (Fla. Ct. App. 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

During closing argument, the prosecutor impermissibly commented on the defendant’s exercise of his Fifth Amendment right [69]*69to remain silent. The error was preserved for appellate review and, thus, we reverse. See Donovan v. State, 417 So.2d 674 (Fla. 1982); Clark v. State, 363 So.2d 331 (Fla. 1978); Shannon v. State, 335 So.2d 5 (Fla. 1976); Bennett v. State, 316 So.2d 41 (Fla. 1975).

REVERSED & REMANDED FOR NEW TRIAL.

HERSEY, HURLEY and DELL, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

During closing argument, the prosecutor impermissibly commented on the defendant’s exercise of his Fifth Amendment right [69]*69to remain silent. The error was preserved for appellate review and, thus, we reverse. See Donovan v. State, 417 So.2d 674 (Fla. 1982); Clark v. State, 363 So.2d 331 (Fla. 1978); Shannon v. State, 335 So.2d 5 (Fla. 1976); Bennett v. State, 316 So.2d 41 (Fla. 1975).

REVERSED & REMANDED FOR NEW TRIAL.

HERSEY, HURLEY and DELL, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

433 So. 2d 68, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mitchell-v-state-fladistctapp-1983.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack