Benedit v. State, 90-349
| Decision Date | 05 February 1991 |
| Docket Number | No. 90-349,90-349 |
| Citation | 575 So.2d 236,16 Fla. L. Weekly 392 |
| Parties | 16 Fla. L. Weekly 392 William BENEDIT, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, and Robert Kalter, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., and Charles M. Fahlbusch, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Before BASKIN, FERGUSON and LEVY, JJ.
This case graphically presents a deadly phenomenon now endemic in our social fabric. In a mindless moment of "machismo", one young man, for reason of a petty grievance, looks for and finds a handgun which he uses to snuff out the life of an acquaintance.
The blame for these recurring incidents has been laid, in great part, on an easy availability of efficient weapons of destruction and an entertainment media which, in glorifying such violence, cheapens the value of human life. Nevertheless, the problem is tossed into the lap of an ill-equipped criminal justice system for a final resolution. When it ends, two sets of families and friends are left grief stricken.
The assailant in this case was indicted by a grand jury for first-degree murder, convicted by a jury of second-degree murder, and sentenced by a judge to twenty years imprisonment. In this appeal from the judgment and sentence, he alleges, among other things, gross prosecutorial misconduct. Although the conviction and sentence must be affirmed--because there is no reasonable possibility that error affected the verdict, State v. DiGuilio, 491 So.2d 1129 (Fla.1986)--we are compelled to condemn the amateurish conduct of the prosecutor in improperly portraying the defendant as a bad character.
Our attention is called to the following questioning and argument by the prosecutor. On direct examination of one of the State's young witnesses:
Ms. Weintraub [prosecutor]: Did the detective ask you anything about your getting into any kind of trouble?
Mr. Palmer [witness]: Yes, he did.
Prosecutor: Did you answer those questions?
Mr. Palmer: Yes.
Prosecutor: And what did you tell him?
Mr. Palmer: I told him what I've done, you know, because he asked me if me and Willie have done anything and I said yes.
On cross-examination of the defendant:
Prosecutor: Mr. Benedit, you have had some problems with the courts before, the Juvenile Court before.
Mr. Denaro [defense counsel]: Objection, Judge.
In closing argument:
Prosecutor: Was [a defense witness] there when Lowell was shot and killed? No ... No, he was not. Why is it important? Because Cobi, who I agree is one of the sweetest witnesses in this case, that has nothing to do with this group of teenagers who all know how to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Benedit v. State, 92-1329
...a direct appeal from the subject conviction where the same point was raised and incorrectly rejected without discussion, Benedit v. State, 575 So.2d 236 (Fla. 3d DCA), rev. denied, 589 So.2d 289 (Fla.1991), especially when the law at the time of the direct appeal was less than a model of cl......
-
Benedit v. State
...289 589 So.2d 289 Benedit (William) v. State NO. 77,823 589 So.2d 289 Supreme Court of Florida. SEP 12, 1991 Appeal From: 3d DCA 575 So.2d 236 Rev. ...