Neely v. State
557 So. 2d 122, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 792, 1990 WL 11783
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Neely v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 565 So. 2d 337 →
Opinion
From the outset of the trial the defense brought forward the defendant’s explanation for his presence in the hotel at the time of the robbery. That distinguishes the present case from Bayshore v. State, 437 So.2d 198 (Fla.3d DCA 1983). The prosecutor’s remark in closing was fair comment upon the opening statement by the defense. See id. at 199.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Neely v. State, 557 So. 2d 122, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 792, 1990 WL 11783 (Fla. Ct. App. 1990).
557 So. 2d 122 (Neely v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Bayshore v. State
437 So. 2d 198 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1983)