Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

396 So. 2d 270

Bell v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1981-04-07

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently May 1981

1 state decisions

Relies on 393 So. 2d 540 - Tascano v. State · 376 So. 2d 1149 - Lucas v. State · 313 So. 2d 692 - Estevez v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1981-04-07

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PER CURIAM.

¶1The defendant did not properly preserve his contention that the trial judge incorrectly failed to give a requested charge on penalties under Tascano v. State, 393 So.2d 540 (Fla.1980) because he did not, as required by Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.390(d), either make any objection to the refusal “before the jury retire[d]” or state “distinctly .. . the grounds of his objection” when it was belatedly made after the jury had already gone out. Bailey v. State, 393 So.2d 24 (Fla.3d DCA 1981); Kelly v. State, 389 So.2d 250 (Fla.2d DCA 1980); Wilson v. State, 383 So.2d 670 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980).

¶2*271The appellant’s other points likewise present no error. See, Lucas v. State, 376 So.2d 1149 (Fla.1979); Estevez v. State, 313 So.2d 692 (Fla.1975).

¶3Affirmed.

/396/so2d/270 · .json · Public domain