Skip to main content

Smith v. State

Citations

  • 818 So. 2d 707
  • 2002 WL 1343475

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • observing that the abuse of discretion standard applied to denials of motions for mistrial requires determining whether an isolated and limited comment is so prejudicial that it vitiates the entire trial
  • confirming denial of a motion for mistrial is reviewed for an abuse of discretion
  • in requesting that the jury return a guilty verdict, prosecutor improperly told the jury that \[y]ou are citizens that speak on behalf of your community in rendering a verdict in this case\. Cf. also Kennerdy v. State, 749 So.2d 507, 507 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999
  • “The reference to the jury speaking for the community did not permeate the closing argument. Rather, it was near the end of the argument and ... would not appear to be so prejudicial as to vitiate the entire trial and thus a mistrial was not warranted.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Sharp

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

7 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

14 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.