Case Name: James NEELY, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1990-02-13
Citations: 557 So. 2d 122
Docket Number: No. 88-1657
Parties: James NEELY, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: Before NESBITT, COPE and GERSTEN, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 557
Pages: 122–122

Head Matter:
James NEELY, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 88-1657.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Feb. 13, 1990.
Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, and Jonathan S. Schwartz, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., and Patricia Ann Ash, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Before NESBITT, COPE and GERSTEN, JJ.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
From the outset of the trial the defense brought forward the defendant's explanation for his presence in the hotel at the time of the robbery. That distinguishes the present case from Bayshore v. State, 437 So.2d 198 (Fla.3d DCA 1983). The prosecutor's remark in closing was fair comment upon the opening statement by the defense. See id. at 199.
Affirmed.