Arrebola v. State

PER CURIAM. As we cannot conclude that the challenged remarks made by the state during its closing arguments in this trial were fundamentally erroneous as urged by the appellant, we affirm his conviction and sentence for burglary of an unoccupied structure. See McDonald v. State, 743 So.2d 501 (Fla.1999); Sandoval v. State, 689 So.2d 1258 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997). Affirm.