Roland v. State

492 So. 2d 712, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 8906
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided July 18, 1986·No. No. BF-437·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

While we affirm the final judgment and sentence of the trial court, we cannot overlook the prosecutor’s improper comments during closing argument. We commend to the trial judge the use of swift and firm remedial action against counsel who engage in improper argument before a jury.

AFFIRMED.

SHIVERS, ZEHMER and BARFIELD, JJ., concur.

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

Roland v. State, 492 So. 2d 712, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 8906 (Fla. Ct. App. 1986).

492 So. 2d 712 (Roland v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Wells v. State
492 So. 2d 712 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1986)