Legal Opinion
Arrebola v. State
District Court of Appeal of Florida
Decided May 10, 2000No. 3D99-2954Published
1Per curiam
As we cannot conclude that the challenged remarks made by the state during its closing arguments in this trial were fundamentally erroneous as urged by the appellant, we affirm his conviction and sentence for burglary of an unoccupied structure. See McDonald v. State, 743 So.2d 501 (Fla.1999); Sandoval v. State, 689 So.2d 1258 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997).
Affirm.
2Cases cited2 opinions
- McDonald v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1999
- Sandoval v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1997