In Easterly v. State, 22 So. 3d 807 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009), the First District Court of Appeal distinguished a prosecutor's comment which states his opinion or belief that the evidence is strong from a prosecutor's comment which projects a statement of the law. In Easterly, the prosecutor stated during closing: The testimonial evidence in this case, the physical evidence in this case, has not only removed the presumption of innocence from this man, it has torn it away and shown him for what he did to K.D. on May of 2004 when he raped her. 22 So. 3d at 816. The First District held that the comment did not constitute fundamental error because it "was tied directly to the prosecutor's perspective on the strength of the evidence." Id. at 817; See also Dailey v. State, 965 So. 2d 38, 44 (Fla. 2007) ("Regarding the prosecutor's statements concerning Dailey's presumption of innocence, we agree with the trial court that when read in context, the comments appear to be a statement by the prosecutor of her belief that the State satisfied its burden of proof. Therefore, counsel's failure to object was not deficient.").