STEPHEN ALOYSIUS BATEY, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Jury Instruction On Flight cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant was convicted for the offenses of burglary and grand larceny. Appellant urges that the trial court erred in instructing the jury on flight, over his objection. Further, appellant contends reversal is required because of certain allegedly improper and prejudicial comments made by the prosecutor during closing arguments.
We find no reversible error and thus affirm the judgment and sentence.
The facts presented at trial were sufficient to find the existence of flight and other circumstances indicating appellant’s guilt. Therefore, the flight may be considered as a circumstance of guilt under an appropriate instruction. Proffitt v. State, 315 So. 2d 461 (Fla.1975); Martinez v. State, 346 So. 2d 1209 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977); Palmer v. State, 323 So. 2d 612 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975), and cases cited therein. Such instruction is not improper as a judicial comment upon the evidence.
We have considered the comments by the prosecutor in his closing argument and do not find that they require reversal.
Accordingly, the judgment and sentence are AFFIRMED.
MILLS, Acting C. J., and ERVIN and BOOTH, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Jackson v. State, 435 So. 2d 984 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983)…nly, there is substantial precedent holding that flight may be considered as a circumstance of guilt and that the court may instruct a jury on it. Such instructions are held “not improper as a judicial comment upon the evidence.” See Batey v. State, 355 So. 2d 1271 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978), and the cases cited therein. Frankly, we are not at all certain as to why an instruction on flight does not constitute an improper comment upon the evidence. We find it noteworthy that in the most recent edition of Florida Stan…
-
Haywood v. State, 466 So. 2d 424 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985)…ses, admittedly predating the dropping of the instruction on flight from the standard jury instructions, e.g., Proffitt v. State, 315 So. 2d 461 (Fla.1975), which approve this instruction; district court cases in the same vein, e.g., Batey v. State, 355 So. 2d 1271 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978); and no supreme court case disapproving use of the instruction, we do not think this court should attempt to break new ground on this question. The instruction given was as follows: Flight is considered to exist when an accused…
-
Cabe v. State, 408 So. 2d 694 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)…ized the existing categories in Brown. The third point raised asserts that error resulted from the court’s instruction on the evidence of flight. We conclude, however, that the evidence was sufficient to support the instruction. See Batey v. State, 355 So. 2d 1271 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978). Appellant’s next point alleges the trial court committed error in denying defendant’s motion for a psychiatric evaluation before imposing an enhanced sentence. The motion was apparently made pursuant to either Rule 3.720(a)(1)…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Proffitt v. State, 315 So. 2d 461 (Fla. 1975)
- Palmer v. State, 323 So. 2d 612 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975)
- Martinez v. State, 346 So. 2d 1209 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977)