Breines v. State, 462 So. 2d 831 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984). · Go Syfert
Search
Breines v. State, 462 So. 2d 831 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
2 citation events across 2 distinct courts.
Charles BREINES
v.
STATE of Florida
No. 83-1936.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
Dec 19, 1984.
462 So. 2d 831
Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender, and Ellen Morris, Asst. Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant., Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Robert L. Teitler, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.
Hersey, Leonard, Letts, Riykind.
Cited by 2 opinions  |  Published

Lead Opinion

RIYKIND, LEONARD, Associate Judge.

Appellant was convicted of drug trafficking. We conclude from a careful examination of the entire record that a decidedly improper remark by the prosecutor in summation “[Y]ou don’t need fingerprints when you have got eyewitnesses ... and I could have brought in five others ...,” was harmless error because of the overwhelming evidence against appellant. See State v. Murray, 443 So.2d 955 (Fla.1984).

The remaining point on appeal concerns the validity of the Florida trafficking statute, § 893.135, Fla. Stat. (1981). It is constitutional. State v. Werner, 402 So.2d 386 (Fla.1981). State v. Benitez, 395 So.2d 514 (Fla.1981).

Affirmed.

HERSEY, J., concurs. LETTS, J., dissents with opinion.

Dissent

LETTS, Judge,

dissenting.

I dissent, because I believe this decision may be in conflict with Thompson v. State, 318 So.2d 549 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975). Moreover, I am far from convinced it was harmless error.