Collins v. State
| Decision Date | 17 November 1965 |
| Docket Number | No. 33989,33989 |
| Citation | 180 So.2d 340 |
| Parties | James E. COLLINS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Giles P. Lewis, Jacksonville, for appellant.
Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., and George R. Georgieff, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
The defendant, James E. Collins, appeals from a judgment of guilt of rape and a sentence of death. Trial was by jury and the verdict was returned without recommendation of mercy.
The sole point on appeal involves that effect of certain remarks made by the prosecutor in his final argument. Only one of these remarks was objected to and the objection was sustained without further comment or instruction by the court. The defendant questions whether the remarks were of such character that neither judicial admonition nor retraction would have erased their influence on the jury and whether there was a waiver by failure to make timely objection.
The evidence of guilt is overwhelming and need not be discussed at length. It establishes that the defendant went to the home of the twelve year old victim while her mother was absent, tore the screen door to gain entrance, grabbed the girl by her throat, choked her with both hands, forced her to cook food for him, forced her into a bedroom, ripped her shoes and panties from her, repeatedly choked her when she screamed or resisted, attempted to penetrate her, forced her to tell where some 'grease' was, smeared this 'grease' on his and her private parts, threatened to kill her, hit her with his hands, forced her legs apart, penetrated her, started moving up and down, and, in her words 'It just ripped me open.' The girl bled, soaking the sheets, and received a tear between her vagina and anus. Medical testimony indicated that she was previously a virgin and that her hymen had been freshly torn.
Following the attack, the defendant choked her again until she promised not to tell on him. While he was removing the sheets from the bed, she took her baby sister and escaped to a neighbor's house where she waited fearfully and with a knife in her hand until her mother returned.
The argument of the prosecutor considered improper by the defendant is
'He makes a big to-do about Charlotte saying that she did not take any food to Collins. This little twelve year old girl, who has gone through the most awesome, horrible, brutal experience that a woman, much less a child, can imagine in their whole lifetime. And then comes this seventh grade student at school into this big Courtroom, with all of the men and the Judge and the lawyers and has to look at this cruel human vulture that raped her and all of her testimony discussing the rape was not shaken the slightest on any of the facts by one of the best criminal minds in the country, didn't recall taking him any food.
'* * *
'Did this man desist at this time, as any normal man would? No, this criminal goes and gets some grease and puts it on the private parts of this little victim and on himself and tries to make her open her legs and she refuses. She testified that he took her hands and pulled them apart and choked her some more. Then, he forcibly injected himself into her and she said, 'It just ripped me open.'
'Can you imagine, this twelve year old girl laying there, having been choked nearly to death and this beast just ripped her open.
'* * *
The reference to one of 'the best criminal minds in the country' was apparently a compliment to defense counsel who later referred to the years he had prosecuted and the years he had defended. While defendant's attorney attributes the remark to the defendant himself, the record of the hearing on the motion for new trial discloses that both the trial judge and the court reporter understood the remark referred to counsel. In any event, the trial court felt that this remark made no impression on the jury. We fail to see how a person charged with a...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Rosso v. State
...excesses in death penalty cases since the situation automatically engenders "florid arguments and dramatic perorations." Collins v. State, 180 So.2d 340, 342 (Fla.1965); see, e.g., Bertolotti v. State, 476 So.2d 130 (Fla.1985) (prosecutor's improper arguments during penalty phase not so out......
-
Holman v. State
...The other points urged as error are found to be without merit. Roberts v. State, 154 So.2d 695 (Fla. 2nd D.C.A. 1963); Collins v. State, 180 So.2d 340 (Fla.1965); Russ v. State, 313 So.2d 758 (Fla.1975); Darden v. State, 329 So.2d 287 (Fla.1976), cert. dism. --- U.S. ---, 97 S.Ct. 1671, 51 ......
-
Wingate v. State, 69--563
...729, 'The rule is that considerable latitude is allowed in arguments on the merits of the case.' And in the case of Collins v. State, Fla.1965, 180 So.2d 340, at page 342, the court 'Each case must be considered upon its own merits and within the circumstances pertaining when the questionab......
-
Grant v. State
...on review. 4 In the State's brief on this question, it seems to take the position that this Court in the recent case of Collins v. State (Fla.1965), 180 So.2d 340, 343, receded from the cases discussed herein which we hold require a reversal of this judgment. No such conclusion is warranted......