Legal Opinion

M.E.F. v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided January 22, 1992No. 91-02042PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Per curiam

The appellant challenges his convictions for burglary and obstructing police officers. We find merit in the appellant’s argument that his constitutional rights were violated when the trial court adjudicated the appellant guilty without first permitting defense counsel to present a closing argument.

In a bench trial or a jury trial, it is an absolute violation of the Sixth Amendment for the court to deny the defendant the right to make closing argument. Herring v. New York, 422 U.S. 853, 95 S.Ct. 2550, 45 L.Ed.2d 593 (1975). It is true that when defense counsel complained, the trial court said…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Herring v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1975

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. United States v. Blanca Estella MartinezCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1992
  2. J.M.S. v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2006
  3. T. McD. v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1992
  4. T.W. v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1996
  5. D.B. v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2008

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API