Price v. State, 72--32
Decision Date | 26 September 1972 |
Docket Number | No. 72--32,72--32 |
Citation | 267 So.2d 39 |
Parties | Johnny Lee PRICE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Kenneth A. Studstill, of Twyford & Studstill, Titusville, for appellant.
Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Andrew I. Friedrich, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.
Appellant's robbery conviction and life sentence must be reversed because certain remarks made by the prosecutor in his closing argument to the jury 1 were of such a character as to deprive appellant of his fundamental right to a fair trial. See Sherman v. State, Fla.1971, 255 So.2d 263; Grant v. State, Fla.1967, 194 So.2d 612; Chavez v. State, Fla.App.1968, 215 So.2d 750; Davis v. State, Fla.App.1968, 214 So.2d 41.
On the authority of the foregoing, as well as the numerous cases cited therein, the judgment and sentence are severally reversed and this cause is remanded for a new trial.
Reversed.
1 The record shows that during closing argument by the prosecutor, Mr. Chesire, the following occurred.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Childers v. State
...Buckhann v. State, 356 So.2d 1327, 1328 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978); Reed v. State, 333 So.2d 524, 525 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976); Price v. State, 267 So.2d 39, 40 (Fla. 4th DCA 1972). When I considered the motion to hear the case en banc, it seemed to me that the panel never fully appreciated the gravity......
-
Childers v. State
...Buckhann v. State, 356 So.2d 1327, 1328 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978); Reed v. State, 333 So.2d 524, 525 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976); Price v. State, 267 So.2d 39, 40 (Fla. 4th DCA 1972). When I considered the motion to hear the case en banc, it seemed to me that panel never fully appreciated the gravity of ......
-
Peterson v. State
...instead erroneously suggested that the prosecutor's remarks were indeed "reasonable comment" on the testimony. See Price v. State, 267 So.2d 39, 40, n. 1 (Fla. 4th DCA 1972).3 The reference to the knowledge of the surveillance officers, the portion of the argument treated in paragraph (2), ......
-
State v. Vallejos
...was misconduct. People v. Alverson, 60 Cal.2d 803, 36 Cal.Rptr. 479, 388 P.2d 711 (1964); People v. Kirkes, supra; Price v. State, 267 So.2d 39 (Fla.App.1972); People v. Reimann, 266 App.Div. 505, 42 N.Y.S.2d 599 (1943); see Annot., 50 A.L.R.2d 766 No objection was made to the district atto......