Grimes v. State

The complained of portion of the Prosecutor’s closing argument, viewed in light of the whole argument and the Court’s instructions, were not of sufficient harm and moment as to dictate a reversal of the defendant’s judgment of conviction of a crime. James v. State, 263 So.2d 284 (2nd D.C.A.Fla.1972); Wingate v. State, 232 So.2d 44 (3rd D.C.A.Fla.1970); and Johnson v. State, 140 Fla. 443, 191 So. 847 (1939).

Affirmed.

WALDEN, MAGER and DOWNEY, JJ., concur.