Case ID: so2d_710/html/0763-03.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

Michael McCOY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 97-2059.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    May 29, 1998.
    James B. Gibson, Public Defender, and Thomas J. Lukashow, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.
    Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Mary G. Jolley, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appel-lee.
   PER CURIAM.

Control of comments during closing argument is within discretion of the trial court and a court’s ruling will not be disturbed absent a clear showing of abuse of discretion. Crump v. State, 622 So.2d 963 (Fla.1993). The court did not limit comment as to a witness’ possible motive for testifying against the defendant, but only limited comment as to possible prison time for the defendant. In a non-capital case any possible sentence for a defendant is a matter for the judge, and not the jury. No abuse of discretion is demonstrated here.

AFFIRMED.

COBB and THOMPSON, JJ., and ORFINGER, M., Senior Judge, concur.