Hood v. State, 73--531
| Decision Date | 14 December 1973 |
| Docket Number | No. 73--531,73--531 |
| Citation | 287 So.2d 110 |
| Parties | Richard HOOD, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Warner S. Olds, Public Defender, and William W. Herring, Asst. Public Defender, Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.
Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Thomas M. Carney and Frank B. Kessler, Asst. Attys. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.
We have reviewed the briefs and record on appeal and on the basis thereof we are of the opinion that no reversible error has been demonstrated. Either a request for a jury instruction or an objection to the failure to give an instruction is necessary to raise error on appeal; likewise, allegedly improper arguments of a prosecuting officer will be reviewed only when an objection is timely made. Henry v. State, Fla.App.1973, 277 So.2d 78; Alford v. State, Fla.App.1973, 280 So.2d 479; Jones v. State, Fla.App.1967, 197 So.2d 829. By reason of not having proceeded in accordance with the foregoing and finding that the matters complained of for the first time on appeal do not constitute fundamental error, the defendant cannot now raise as error the trial court's instructions or the prosecutor's comments. See State v. Bryan, Supreme Court of Florida Case, 287 So.2d 73, opinion filed November 14, 1973; Williams v. State, Fla.1971, 247 So.2d 425; Willcox v. State, Fla.App.1972, 258 So.2d 298; Smith v. State, Fla.App.1971, 243 So.2d 602; Jones v. State, Fla.App.1967, 197 So.2d 829; DeLaine v. State, Fla.1972, 262 So.2d 655. But see Whitehead v. State, Fla.App.1971, 245 So.2d 94; Bagley v. State, Fla.App.1960, 119 So.2d 400.
Accordingly, the judgment herein appealed is affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Martin v. State
...does not demonstrate that the defendant requested said instruction below. See Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.390(d) ; see also Hood v. State, 287 So.2d 110, 110 (Fla. 4th DCA 1973) (explaining that a request for a jury instruction or an objection to the failure to give an instruction is necessary to ra......
-
Simpkin v. State
...an instruction is a prerequisite to raising error on appeal. See, e. g., Flagler v. State, 198 So.2d 313 (Fla.1967); Hood v. State, 287 So.2d 110 (Fla. 4th DCA 1973); Clements v. State, 284 So.2d 700 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973); and Alford v. State, 280 So.2d 479 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973). Also, I recogniz......
-
House v. State, 76-869
...377 (Fla.1963); Lightfoot v. State, 331 So.2d 388 (Fla.2d DCA 1976); Porter v. State, 301 So.2d 808 (Fla.3d DCA 1974); Hood v. State, 287 So.2d 110 (Fla.4th DCA 1973); Miles v. State, 258 So.2d 333 (Fla.3d DCA Reversed and remanded for new trial. ...
-
Austin v. Wainwright, 73--1350
...constituted fundamental error. Although an objection should have been made, and the lack of one can preclude review, Hood v. State, 287 So.2d 110 (4th D.C.A.Fla.1973); Williams v. State, 247 So.2d 425 (Fla.1971), if the error was fundamental, it will be reviewed notwithstanding, Smith v. St......