JONATHAN STEELE, APPELLANT,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By

• Bell v. State, 33 So. 3d 724 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010)
  …ut of context is more problematic. However, “[w]here there is an allegation of improper comments by a prosecutor, we do not consider the comments themselves in a vacuum; rather, we view the allegedly-wrongful comments in context.” McKenney v. State, 967 So. 2d 951, 955 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007). When reading the statement in context it becomes clear the prosecutor was not commenting on appellant’s silence; instead, the prosecutor was arguing that no evidence had been offered to suggest the victim had a motive to li…
• Young v. State, 137 So. 3d 532 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014)
  …y. The State maintains there is no indication that the prosecutor’s comments deprived Young of a fair trial. We disagree. When reviewing the impropriety of a prosecutor’s comments, the court must consider the comments in context. McKenney v. State, 967 So. 2d 951, 955 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007). The comments are not improper if they were “invited” by defense counsel’s preceding argument on the same topic. Scott v. State, 66 So. 3d 923, 930 (Fla.2011). “[Ujnder the ‘invited response’ doctrine, the State is permitted…
• Wright v. State, 317 So. 3d 237 (Fla. 3d DCA 2021)

Authorities Cited

• Hampton v. McDONOUGH, 967 So. 2d 317 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007)