Case ID: so2d_547/html/0345-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Leemar Joseph JOHNS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    Nos. 87-1565, 88-98.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    Aug. 15, 1989.
    
      Jeffery P. Raffle, Coral Gables, for appellant.
    Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., and Patricia Ann Ash, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
    Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and JORGENSON and LEVY, JJ.
   PER CURIAM.

The appellant’s conviction for robbery with a firearm is reversed for a new trial because the prosecutor’s cross-examination of the defendant concerning his prior convictions, which repeatedly and sarcastically emphasized the issue, prejudicially went beyond the boundaries of the simple question and answer permitted by the applicable law. See McArthur v. Cook, 99 So.2d 565 (Fla.1957); Sneed v. State, 397 So.2d 931 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981); see also Bryan v. State, 533 So.2d 744 (Fla.1988), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 109 S.Ct. 1765, 104 L.Ed.2d 200 (1989).

It is unnecessary to discuss the remaining points because they are unlikely to recur at the new trial.

Reversed.