Washington v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Washington v. State

210 So. 2d 290

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 8, 1968

DocketNo. 67-328

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 210 So. 2d 290 (Washington 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

Washington v. State, 210 So. 2d 290 (Fla. Ct. App. 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant seeks reversal of a judgment of conviction entered on a jury verdict finding him guilty of breaking and entering with intent to commit a misdemeanor. His sole contention of error is that the Assistant State Attorney, in his closing argument to the jury, improperly commented on appellant’s failure to testify, thus violating Florida Statutes, Section 918.09 (1965), F.S.A.

When taken in the context of the record as a whole, the assailed statement constitutes nothing more than a comment on the evidence as it existed before the jury. As such, it was legitimate. See State v. Jones, Fla.1967, 204 So.2d 515, 516-18; Clinton v. State, 1908, 56 Fla. 57, 61-62, 47 So. 389, 390; Gray v. State, 1900, 42 Fla. 174, 176-177, 28 So. 53-54; Woodside v. State, Fla.App.1968, 206 So.2d 426, 428-429; cf. Gordon v. State, Fla.1958, 104 So.2d 524, 539-541; Trafficante v. State, Fla.1957, 92 So.2d 811, 812-814; Way v. State, Fla.1953, 67 So.2d 321, 322. The appealed judgment is accordingly affirmed.

Affirmed.

ALLEN, Acting C. J., and PIERCE and HOBSON,. JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant seeks reversal of a judgment of conviction entered on a jury verdict finding him guilty of breaking and entering with intent to commit a misdemeanor. His sole contention of error is that the Assistant State Attorney, in his closing argument to the jury, improperly commented on appellant’s failure to testify, thus violating Florida Statutes, Section 918.09 (1965), F.S.A.

When taken in the context of the record as a whole, the assailed statement constitutes nothing more than a comment on the evidence as it existed before the jury. As such, it was legitimate. See State v. Jones, Fla.1967, 204 So.2d 515, 516-18; Clinton v. State, 1908, 56 Fla. 57, 61-62, 47 So. 389, 390; Gray v. State, 1900, 42 Fla. 174, 176-177, 28 So. 53-54; Woodside v. State, Fla.App.1968, 206 So.2d 426, 428-429; cf. Gordon v. State, Fla.1958, 104 So.2d 524, 539-541; Trafficante v. State, Fla.1957, 92 So.2d 811, 812-814; Way v. State, Fla.1953, 67 So.2d 321, 322. The appealed judgment is accordingly affirmed.

Affirmed.

ALLEN, Acting C. J., and PIERCE and HOBSON,. JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

210 So. 2d 290, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/washington-v-state-fladistctapp-1968.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack