Rojas v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Rojas v. State

469 So. 2d 849, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1148, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 13855

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 7, 1985

DocketNo. 84-553

StatusPublished

This text of 469 So. 2d 849 (Rojas 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

Rojas v. State, 469 So. 2d 849, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1148, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 13855 (Fla. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Celedonio Rojas appeals his conviction and sentence for first degree murder with a firearm. We affirm.

We find that appellant has presented no grounds warranting reversal. With regard to the allegedly improper prosecutorial comments, it appears from the record that appellant failed to comply with the contemporaneous objection rule, Ferguson v. State, 417 So.2d 639 (Fla.1982); State v. Cumbie, 380 So.2d 1031 (Fla.1980); Castor v. State, 365 So.2d 701 (Fla.1978); Clark v. State, 363 So.2d 331 (Fla.1978), and that the objected to comments constituted neither fundamental nor prejudicial error. See Ferguson; Cumbie. We remand, however, for the entry of a corrected sentence which accurately reflects the twenty-five year mandatory minimum sentence imposed by the trial court pursuant to sections 782.04 and 775.082, Florida Statutes (1981).

Affirmed as modified.

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

PER CURIAM.

Celedonio Rojas appeals his conviction and sentence for first degree murder with a firearm. We affirm.

We find that appellant has presented no grounds warranting reversal. With regard to the allegedly improper prosecutorial comments, it appears from the record that appellant failed to comply with the contemporaneous objection rule, Ferguson v. State, 417 So.2d 639 (Fla.1982); State v. Cumbie, 380 So.2d 1031 (Fla.1980); Castor v. State, 365 So.2d 701 (Fla.1978); Clark v. State, 363 So.2d 331 (Fla.1978), and that the objected to comments constituted neither fundamental nor prejudicial error. See Ferguson; Cumbie. We remand, however, for the entry of a corrected sentence which accurately reflects the twenty-five year mandatory minimum sentence imposed by the trial court pursuant to sections 782.04 and 775.082, Florida Statutes (1981).

Affirmed as modified.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

469 So. 2d 849, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1148, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 13855, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rojas-v-state-fladistctapp-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack