Williams v. State, No. 82-436

CourtCourt of Appeal of Florida (US)
Writing for the CourtSCHWARTZ
Citation425 So.2d 591
PartiesMichael T. WILLIAMS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Decision Date28 December 1982
Docket NumberNo. 82-436

Page 591

425 So.2d 591
Michael T. WILLIAMS, Appellant,
v.
The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 82-436.
District Court of Appeal of Florida,
Third District.
Dec. 28, 1982.

Page 592

Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender and Mark King Leban, Sp. Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Jim Smith, Atty. Gen. and Jack B. Ludin, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Before SCHWARTZ, BASKIN and FERGUSON, JJ.

SCHWARTZ, Judge.

Williams was convicted of the armed robbery of a supermarket. In treating his sole point on appeal, we once more find, as we have recently with wearying repetitiveness, see Jackson v. State, 421 So.2d 15 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982), and cases cited; Hines v. State, 425 So.2d 589 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982), that the prosecutor's final argument was infected with error. Statements like the one made below--which was exacerbated by being substantially repeated with the apparent approval of the trial court--that if Williams were found not guilty, "he can walk out of this courtroom [and] go to work again just like he did that night," 1 have been condemned in a long and uninterrupted series of Florida cases. Gomez v. State, 415 So.2d 822 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); McMillian v. State, 409 So.2d 197 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Sims v. State, 371 So.2d 211 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979); Porter v. State, 347 So.2d 449 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977); Russell v. State, 233 So.2d 154 (Fla. 4th DCA 1970); Chavez v. State, 215 So.2d 750 (Fla. 2d DCA 1968); Davis v. State, 214 So.2d 41 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968).

While we therefore thoroughly disapprove of the argument, we cannot hold that it justifies reversal. The evidence against Williams, which included a photograph taken of him while the robbery was being committed, was so overwhelming that the statements must be regarded as no more than harmless improprieties. E.g., Zamot v. State, 375 So.2d 881 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979).

Affirmed.

---------------

1 The pertinent portion of the transcript is as follows:

[MS. WEINTRAUB]: Defense counsel told you and I agree with him, if you find Michael Williams, the Defendant, not guilty, he can walk out of this courtroom. He can walk out, go to work again just like he did that night, nicely dressed.

MR. SCHWARTZ: Objection, your Honor. I have a motion.

May we approach the bench.

THE COURT: Let's have a side bar.

(Thereupon, counsel for the respective parties and the court reporter approached the bench and the following proceedings were had outside the hearing of the jury:)

MR. SCHWARTZ: Your Honor, the Defendant objects to the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
18 practice notes
  • Edwards v. State, No. 82-731
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • March 22, 1983
    ...have been consistently admonished, and the arguments have been condemned as unfair, intemperate, and unethical. See Williams v. State, 425 So.2d 591 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Hines v. State, 425 So.2d 589 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Jackson v. State, 421 So.2d 15 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Chapman v. State, 417......
  • Carr v. State, No. 82-1056
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • May 10, 1983
    ...attorney in the course of his closing argument. 2 This is a situation which arises with shocking frequency. See, e.g., Williams v. State, 425 So.2d 591 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Hines v. State, 425 So.2d 589 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Jackson v. State, 421 So.2d 15 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Chapman v. State, ......
  • Hightower v. State, No. 91-488
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • December 10, 1991
    ...and pointed it. For all of the foregoing reasons, we find ourselves in the same position that this Court described in Williams v. State, 425 So.2d 591 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982) wherein the Court stated, at page 592, "While we therefore thoroughly disapprove of the argument, we cannot hold that it ......
  • Perdomo v. State, No. 82-1133
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • October 18, 1983
    ...dissenting. I dissent and would affirm under the reasoning found in Ferguson v. State, 417 So.2d 639 (Fla.1982); Williams v. State, 425 So.2d 591 (Fla. 3d DCA...
  • Request a trial to view additional results
18 cases
  • Edwards v. State, No. 82-731
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • March 22, 1983
    ...have been consistently admonished, and the arguments have been condemned as unfair, intemperate, and unethical. See Williams v. State, 425 So.2d 591 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Hines v. State, 425 So.2d 589 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Jackson v. State, 421 So.2d 15 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Chapman v. State, 417......
  • Hightower v. State, No. 91-488
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • December 10, 1991
    ...and pointed it. For all of the foregoing reasons, we find ourselves in the same position that this Court described in Williams v. State, 425 So.2d 591 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982) wherein the Court stated, at page 592, "While we therefore thoroughly disapprove of the argument, we cannot hold that it ......
  • Carr v. State, No. 82-1056
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • May 10, 1983
    ...attorney in the course of his closing argument. 2 This is a situation which arises with shocking frequency. See, e.g., Williams v. State, 425 So.2d 591 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Hines v. State, 425 So.2d 589 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Jackson v. State, 421 So.2d 15 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Chapman v. State, ......
  • Perdomo v. State, No. 82-1133
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • October 18, 1983
    ...dissenting. I dissent and would affirm under the reasoning found in Ferguson v. State, 417 So.2d 639 (Fla.1982); Williams v. State, 425 So.2d 591 (Fla. 3d DCA...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT