
    J. E. Porter, Plaintiff in Error, v. The State of Florida, Defendant in Error.
    
    Opinion Filed November 18, 1922.
    Where proof of guilt is inconclusive errors of procedure in the admission of evidence and comments of counsel for the • state cannot be considered harmless.
    A Writ of Error to the Criminal Court of Record for Duval County; J. M. Peeler, Judge.
    Reversed.
    
      Ion L. Earris and Lacy W. Mahon, for Plaintiff in Error;
    
      Rivers Buford, Attorney General, and Marvin G. McIntosh, Assistant, for the State.
   Per Curiam

The charge in this case is grand larceny. The property alleged to have been stolen is an automobile. The verdict- was guilty as charged with recommendation of mercy of the court. By writ of error tbe judgment adjudging guilt and imposing sentence is here for review.

Because of tbe inconclusive character of tbe proof, errors assigned in tbe admission of evidence respecting other similar offenses alleged to have been committed by tbe defendant and comments of counsel on behalf of tbe State during tbe trial regarding such alleged crimes cannot be considered as harmless errors, and it is considered that justice demands another trial of tbe case when a recurrence of such errors are improbable.

Eeversed.

Browne, C. J., and Taylor, Whitfield, Ellis and West, J. J., concur.  