From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Smith v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Jan 31, 1991
573 So. 2d 1015 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

Opinion

No. 90-826.

January 31, 1991.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County; John D. Southwood, Judge.

J. Garfield Hurt, Jacksonville, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Carolyn J. Mosley, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, for appellee.


The appellant raises four issues on appeal following his conviction for possession of cocaine and subsequent sentencing as a habitual felony offender. We find that the question of prejudice arising from remarks characterizing the arrest scene as a high-crime area was neither properly preserved for appeal nor so prejudicial as to require reversal. See Correll v. State, 523 So.2d 562 (Fla. 1988); Gillion v. State, 573 So.2d 810 (Fla. 1991). The appellant's second issue on appeal was a challenge to the trial court's denial of a motion to suppress the cocaine recovered at the time of arrest. We find that the appellant voluntarily abandoned the cocaine in question.

The appellant's final two issues were in the nature of a constitutional attack on the habitual felony offender statute which we find to have no merit. See Arnold v. State, 566 So.2d 37 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1990); Johnson v. State, 564 So.2d 1174 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990); King v. State, 557 So.2d 899 (Fla. 5th DCA), rev. denied, 564 So.2d 1086 (Fla. 1990).

Affirmed.

SMITH, BARFIELD and WOLF, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Smith v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Jan 31, 1991
573 So. 2d 1015 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)
Case details for

Smith v. State

Case Details

Full title:REGGIE SMITH, APPELLANT, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District

Date published: Jan 31, 1991

Citations

573 So. 2d 1015 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

Citing Cases

Johnson v. State

See Jamison v. State, 583 So.2d 413 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991); McCall v. State, 583 So.2d 411 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991).…

Hale v. State

We affirm in part, and reverse in part. We reject appellant's equal protection, due process, and void for…