Cole v. State
Roy Lynn COLE, Jr., Appellant/Cross-Appellee v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Cross-Appellant
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
PER CURIAM.
AFFIRMED.
PETERSON and GRIFFIN, JJ., concur. DAUKSCH, J., dissents with opinion.
Dissent
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
DAUKSCH, Judge,
dissenting.
The comments of the prosecutor regarding the defendant’s pre-arrest silence coupled with the judge’s permitting the jurors to direct questions to the witnesses coupled with the foreman of the jury asking if the defendant was going to testify created a violation of the defendant’s right to a fair trial. In my opinion there should be a rule prohibiting jurors from participating as examiners of witnesses and this case exemplifies the hazards inherent.
That the defendant is guilty is of little doubt but all accused persons are entitled to a fair trial. In addition to, in fact paramount to, the duty of a prosecütor to seek a conviction is the duty to assure a fair trial. It is justice the state, through the court, seeks, not anything less. To require a new trial is the only effective remedy for the most serious misconduct.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 1 case
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.