May I suggest that - who ever needs such an identification - does more than just sending a photo! For plant identification, it is very important to know - what Rocco Labadessa already asked for - whether a plant is wild or cultivated. Then, one should describe a little bit about the habitat, especially rainfall, soil qualities, but also other plants growing around - even the continent/region/country has not been provided in this request. I would be VERY careful to identify a species just on the basis of one photo!!! This approach is similar to a medical doctor to diagnose a disease on the basis of a photo. We should not perform science that way!
I completely agree with Brigitte Lucie Maass. Actually this was one of the very few cases in which a photo can let us getting to the (almost correct) species identification.
I personally think that such "identification questions" should be interpreted as mere games. I believe that taxonomists could benefit from this kind of visual exercise. Of course, scientists who need species identification for research purposes should refer to more accurate and secure identification process!!
Yes, i agree with both Brigitte Lucie Maass and Rocco Labadessa. More and more information get correct identification so present as probable as data and character.
It is Euphorbia marginata. The latex of this ornamental species can be dangerous on face (Contact Dermatitis 1985 13(1)44 et 1991 24(2)155 cited by http://www.euphorbia.de/res5.htm)
I think for anyone with a possible ID in mind it would be more appropriate to check the given answers first, if a suggested ID matches with what you had in mind you upvote it, if not, you can offer your own suggestion. In my opinion it's only self-serving to keep adding the same ID to a question that already contains that ID.