Ridenour v. State
This text of 707 So. 2d 1183 (Ridenour 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.
Opinion
Cable Ridenour challenges his convictions for aggravated battery on the ground that the prosecutor made allegedly improper comments during closing argument. Defense counsel did not object to any of the State’s remarks. In his argument on appeal, Riden-our also charges that his counsel was ineffective, based on this failure to object. We hold that the prosecutor’s statements did not rise to the level of fundamental error, and affirm Ridenour’s conviction. Our affirmance is without prejudice to his filing a motion under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 to assert his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
707 So. 2d 1183, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 2882, 1998 WL 130075, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ridenour-v-state-fladistctapp-1998.