Jordan v. State, 441 So. 2d 657

PER CURIAM.

The prosecutor’s closing argument comments relating to the defendant dispensing drugs were not improper where the information charged the defendant with trafficking in heroin and cocaine (which, by definition, connotes dispensing),¹ notwithstanding that the trafficking charge was based on the defendant being in possession of such drugs in excess of the minimum amounts set forth in Sections 893.135(b)l and (c)2, Florida Statutes (1981).

The defendant’s various contentions that the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions for trafficking in narcotics and carrying a concealed firearm are not properly preserved for appellate review where no motion for judgment of acquittal was made at the conclusion of the case. State v. Barber, 301 So.2d 7 (Fla.1974).

Affirmed.

Notes

1 . Trafficking is defined as: “Trading or dealing in certain goods and commonly used in connection with illegal narcotic sales.” Black’s Law Dictionary 1340 (rev. 5th ed. 1979).

Case Details

Case Name: Jordan v. State

Court Name: District Court of Appeal of Florida

Date Published: Oct 4, 1983

Citations: 441 So. 2d 657; 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 25466; No. 82-2543

Docket Number: No. 82-2543

Court Abbreviation: Fla. Dist. Ct. App.