¶1A new trial is required in this case because of a manifest, plainly harmful violation, over the preserved objections of defense counsel, of the principles stated in Brown v. State, 719 So.2d 882 (Fla.1998) and Rios v. State, 730 So.2d 831 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999)[24 FLW D937], both of which were decided after the trial. See also State v. Emmund, 698 So.2d 1318 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997). The other points raised by the appellant have no merit.
¶2Reversed.