Fla. Stat, (1981) - Florida State University College of Law

utilized the stature of his office and told the jury that 'I.** we prosecute
about 6,000 felony cases a year and e don't have t k
to sit down and coach
thn as much as Mr. Link wants you to think we sit down and coach them".
(T. 2252). He tha further attacked defense counsel and the defendant:
Mr. Link got up here and he accused us and you heard Judge Olliff
the first day tell him not to use the phrase bribexy in addressing
the State, and not using the vmrd bribery of (sic) getting Joan
Bennett to testify. And the Judge told him, but he went on and
did it. NCW, he's up to the mark, I man, in his zeal to get
this killer off, he's going tm far. Because we haven't bribed
anyhdy and that's not the proper phrase for a lawyer to use
anyway. It's inproper type of conduct and he just went tm far,
his zeal to walk this killer out of here for one reason. (T. 2253).
The defense objections and mtion for mistrail was ignored; the court
simply told the State Attorney to "proceed". (T. 2253-2254). At the end of the
State Attorney's argmmt, defense counsel again objected and mved for a mistrial,
again in vain. (T. 2277).
In Wilson v. State, 294 So. 2d 327 CFla. 1974), the law amlicable to
_.
irrcproper pmsecutorial ccmmt was succinctly stated:
The State points out that in s m instances there was an
absence of objection iA the present trial and in other instances
an objection to the Nmpr infexences was sustained. Such absence
will not suffice where the cmts or repeated references are so
prejudicial to the defedant that neither rebuke nor retraction may
entirely destroy their influence in attaining a fair trial. Id. at
329.
The inproprieties in argument by the prosecutor should caprise textbook
examples of what a prosecutor should not do in sumation:
1). A prosecutor may not engage in Vitriolic naw-calling of the defendant.
See Peterson v. State, 376 So. 2d 1230 (Fla. 4th D.C.A. 1979): "pushers";
'tslk''; Groebner v. -I State 342 So. 2d 94 (Fla. 3rd D.C.A. 1977): %burglar,
vmmus, extortionist, a leopard who never changes his spts"; - bed v.
State, 333 So. 2d 542 (Fla. 1st D.C.A. 1976): "dope peddlers"; Blunt
v. State, 397 So. 2d 1047 (Fla. 4th D.C.A. 1981): "anhls belong in
cages"; Wade v. State, 431 So. 2d 1031 (Fla. 4th D.C,A. 1983): "a real
live murderer". Here, the defendant was called a I'predator", a "shark",
Page -45-