LEE A. THARPE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY ET AL., PETITIONERS,

v.

BILL EUGENE CHIVERS ET AL., RESPONDENTS

Citator

Cited By (33 total)

• Teffeteller v. State, 439 So. 2d 840 (Fla. 1983)
  …alty, the defendant, in due course, will be released from prison and will kill again, this time two of the witnesses who testified against him, and maybe others. There is no place in our system of jurisprudence for this argument. See Grant v. State, 194 So. 2d 612 (Fla.1967); Singer v. State, 109 So. 2d 7 (Fla.1959); Williams v. State, 68 So. 2d 583 (Fla.1953); Stewart v. State, 51 So. 2d 494 (Fla.1951); Sims v. State, 371 So. 2d 211 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979).2 We thus reverse the sentence of death for first-degree…
• Ryan v. State, 457 So. 2d 1084 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984)
  …DCA 1975), cert. denied, 333 So. 2d 465 (Fla.1976). As a general rule, improper prose-cutorial remarks can constitute reversible error when such remarks may have prejudiced and influenced the jury into finding the defendant guilty. Grant v. State, 194 So. 2d 612 (Fla.1967). The Florida Supreme Court recently expounded upon this issue in Murray, supra. Justice Shaw, speaking for the Court stated: [PJrosecutorial error alone does not warrant automatic reversal of a conviction [*1087] unless the errors invol…
• Enoch Lewis, Jr. v. State, 377 So. 2d 640 (Fla. 1979)
  …rom the prosecutor’s remarks. This is unlike the cases where prejudicial error was found in the prosecutor’s request that the jury consider whether they, or others, would be the defendant’s next victims if they failed to convict him. Grant v. State, 194 So. 2d 612 (Fla.1967); Stewart v. State, 51 So. 2d 494 (Fla.1951). Clearly, such a statement would be irrelevant to the innocence or guilt of the accused for the crime charged and, as such, would constitute an improper and highly inflammatory matter to present…