Hooks v. State, 70--531
| Decision Date | 25 June 1971 |
| Docket Number | No. 70--531,70--531 |
| Citation | 250 So.2d 322 |
| Parties | Harold Raymond HOOKS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Walter N. Colbath, Jr., Public Defender, and Jeffrey H. Barker, Asst. Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.
Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Charles W. Musgrove, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.
Appellant was convicted of two counts of sale of LSD and two counts of possession of LSD. An indigent, he promptly made known his desire to appeal. The public defender, although timely appointed to represent him for that purpose, filed notice of appeal untimely. Consequently, we have no jurisdiction of the direct appeal. We exercise the prerogative of treating the notice of appeal as a petition for writ of habeas corpus in order to afford delayed appellate review. Baggett v. Wainwright, Fla.1969, 229 So.2d 239 and Collins v. State, Fla.App.1970, 230 So.2d 711.
The first question is whether the evidence was sufficient to sustain the conviction. All inferences reasonably to be drawn from the evidence are to be viewed in a light most favorable to the verdict. Crum v. State, Fla.App.1965, 172 So.2d 24. When so considered we find that even though some of the evidence is circumstantial, there is in the record substantial competent evidence to support the verdict, which is all that is required. Zalla v. State, Fla.1952, 61 So.2d 649.
The second question is whether the court erred in denying appellant's motion for a mistrial made during the prosecutor's closing argument. The motion for mistrial was predicated on alleged improper indirect comment on the defendant's failure to testify in his own behalf. The prosecutor's statement, interrupted by the objection before the statement was completed, was as follows:
'MR. BROWN (Prosecutor):
The prosecutor's unfinished statement reasonably cannot be construed as a comment upon the defendant's failure to testify in his own behalf. Although the statement was interrupted, it is clear (and was so explained by the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Sims v. State
...limit provided by law "[the] court does not have jurisdiction and has, therefore, no alternative but to [d]ismiss"); Hooks v. State, 250 So.2d 322, 323 (Fla. 4th DCA 1971) (holding that the court did not have jurisdiction to review the untimely notice of appeal, despite the fact that the in......
-
Mathis v. State
...Fla.App.1962, 139 So.2d 179; Hand v. State, Fla.App.1966, 188 So.2d 364; Luke v. State, Fla.App.1967, 204 So.2d 359; Hooks v. State, Fla.App.1971, 250 So.2d 322; Singleton v. State, Fla.App.1966, 183 So.2d 245; and State v. Jones, supra. The views expressed herein are in no way intended to ......
-
Hooks v. State, 41476
...ADKINS, Justice. By petition for certiorari, we are asked to review a decision of the District Court of Appeal, Fourth District, (Hooks v. State, 250 So.2d 322), which allegedly conflicts with prior decisions of other District Courts of Appeal as well as this Petitioner, an indigent, was re......
-
Childers v. State
...v. State, 267 So.2d 846 (Fla.App.1972), indicates the type of permissible and impermissible comments. See, in particular, Hooks v. State, 250 So.2d 322 (Fla.App.1971). It is my view that based upon the facts and circumstances of this case, when taken in context of the record as a whole and ......