BERNARD COOPER
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA

Fla. 1st DCA | 2025-02-19
No. 1D2022-2439
2025 FL 1395 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (2025)

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.


Holding

When trial counsel fails to adequately preserve objections to prosecutorial misconduct, appellate review is limited to fundamental error, and no fundamental error occurred here with respect to alleged witness bolstering, badgering, and improper closing argument.


Headnotes

[1] When defense counsel fails to adequately preserve objections to prosecutorial statements or conduct at trial, the appellate court reviews for fundamental error rather tha…

Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

Bernard Cooper was convicted of one count of lewd or lascivious molestation and three counts of sexual battery on a child, and was sentenced to life i…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.


Opinion of the Court

February 19, 2025 PER CURIAM.

Bernard Cooper challenges his convictions and life sentences for one count of lewd or lascivious molestation and three counts of sexual battery on a child. Cooper contends that the State impermissibly bolstered witnesses, badgered a defense witness, and made improper statements during closing arguments. Cooper concedes that his trial counsel failed to adequately preserve objections to the prosecutor’s statements and actions. Therefore, we review for fundamental error. Goodwin v. State, 751 So. 2d 537, 544 (Fla. 1999) (“If the error is not properly preserved or is unpreserved, the conviction can be reversed only if the error is ‘fundamental.’”). Having thoroughly examined the record on appeal, we conclude no fundamental error occurred.

AFFIRMED. OSTERHAUS, C.J., and BILBREY and NORDBY, JJ., concur.

_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw