Case ID: so2d_505/html/0016-02.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

Shellman PETERSON, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 85-1582.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Tird Distrhict.
    April 7, 1987.
    Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, and James H. Greason, Sp. Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.
    Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., and Richard L. Polin, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Jeri L. Weintraub, Certified Legal Intern, for appellee.
    Before HUBBART, DANIEL S. PEARSON and JORGENSON, JJ.
   PER CURIAM.

We affirm the defendant’s convictions for first-degree murder and robbery with a firearm upon a holding that the claimed error that the trial court unduly restricted the defendant’s cross-examination of his accomplice was not preserved for review by an appropriate proffer of the intended testimony. See Silveira-Hemandez v. State, 495 So.2d 914 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986); A. McD. v. State, 422 So.2d 336 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Ketrow v. State, 414 So.2d 298 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982).

Affirmed.