Case Name: Luis M. ACOSTA, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1992-06-09
Citations: 599 So. 2d 284
Docket Number: No. 91-3025
Parties: Luis M. ACOSTA, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: Before BASKIN, FERGUSON and JORGENSON, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 599
Pages: 284–284

Head Matter:
Luis M. ACOSTA, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 91-3025.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
June 9, 1992.
Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, and Rosa C. Figarola, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., and Roberta G. Mandel, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Before BASKIN, FERGUSON and JORGENSON, JJ.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
We affirm defendant's convictions for possession of marijuana and cocaine. Defendant did not preserve for review the trial court's failure to declare a mistrial, see Riechmann v. State, 581 So.2d 133 (Fla.1991), or its failure to give the agreed upon cautionary instruction. Castor v. State, 365 So.2d 701, 703 (Fla.1978); Crespo v. State, 505 So.2d 685 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987). Furthermore, the record does not disclose that the prosecutor's question constituted fundamental error. See Woodard v. State, 579 So.2d 875 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991).
Affirmed.