Case Name: David Lee HARRIS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1984-04-03
Citations: 447 So. 2d 1020
Docket Number: No. 83-758
Parties: David Lee HARRIS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and HENDRY and FERGUSON, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 447
Pages: 1020–1020

Head Matter:
David Lee HARRIS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 83-758.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
April 3, 1984.
Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, Gitlitz, Keegan & Dittmar, Miami, and James D. Keegan, Sp. Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.
Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., and G. Bart Bill-brough, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and HENDRY and FERGUSON, JJ.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
We reverse the appellant's second degree murder conviction for a new trial because of the prosecutor's totally irrelevant and highly prejudicial cross-examination of the defendant and his girlfriend-witness to the effect that he was a procurer and she, his prostitute. Bennett v. State, 316 So.2d 41 (Fla.1975); Harris v. State, 427 So.2d 234 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Malcolm v. State, 415 So.2d 891 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Glantz v. State, 343 So.2d 88 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977). In the light of the relative closeness of the self-defense claim asserted by the defendant, we cannot find that this clear error was harmless. Wright v. State, 446 So.2d 208 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984), and cases cited; compare State v. Murray, 443 So.2d 955 (Fla.1984).
Reversed.
. In addition, the state attorney did not proffer evidence sufficient even to show that there was any truth to these allegations. See Smith v. State, 414 So.2d 7 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982), and cases cited.