Mendez v. State

Aristides P. Mendez was convicted of breaking and entering an automobile with intent to commit grand larceny, and he appeals.

Affirmed. This appeal is from a conviction of breaking and entering an automobile with intent to commit grand larceny.

The first claim for reversal is that the state's evidence is circumstantial and insufficient. We have reviewed the evidence and find it sufficient to support the jury's verdict.

The second ground of attack is directed to an assertion that inflammatory remarks were made to the jury in the closing argument by the state attorney. On this we also must hold…