WILLIAM P. TROTTER, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Admission Of Evidence cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant was found guilty by a jury under a four count information charging him with aggravated battery, aggravated child abuse, and two counts of battery upon a law enforcement officer. The trial court entered judgment of conviction on all four counts and sentenced appellant to serve in the State Penitentiary as follows: as to Counts I and II, fifteen years on each of the counts; as to Count III, sixty days; and credit of seventy-eight days for time served.
Appellant seeks reversal on the grounds that the trial court erred in admitting into evidence police officer’s testimony concerning victim’s narrative police report and that the trial court erred in denying appellant’s motion to sever counts.
We have carefully considered the grounds relied upon by appellant for reversal and have concluded in the light of the record, briefs and arguments of counsel, that no reversible error has been shown. The record discloses that the case was fully and fairly tried, that the verdict is supported by the evidence and that the several rulings of the trial court challenged by appellant did not, on the record and under the law, constitute harmful error. Therefore, the judgment and sentences appealed are affirmed.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (13 total)
-
Dartha Killingsworth Thompson v. Thompson, 402 So. 2d 1220 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981)…v. Alford, 364 So. 2d 1255 (Fla.2d DCA 1978); Hall v. Hall, 363 So. 2d 137 (Fla.2d DCA 1978), cert. denied, 370 So. 2d 459 (Fla.1979). . She did receive a $10,000 lump sum amount. . Fodor v. Fodor, 379 So. 2d 466 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980); Shaw v. Shaw, 369 So. 2d 81 (Fla.3d DCA 1979).…
-
Matos v. Otsenre E. Matos, 421 So. 2d 180 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982)…trial judge should carefully determine whether or not the master’s findings and determinations are supported by substantial, competent evidence or whether there is any other departure from the essential requirements of applicable law. Shaw v. Shaw, 369 So. 2d 81 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979). There are no such findings by the trial [*184] judge. However, where the trial judge chooses to appoint a master to hear the testimony and make findings of fact and determinations based thereon, the trial judge loses the prerogat…
-
Fodor v. Fodor, 379 So. 2d 466 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980)…e general master denying appellant’s petition for modification. The law is clear that the trial court should approve a master’s findings of fact and recommendations, unless the master has misconceived the legal effect of the evidence. Shaw v. Shaw, 369 So. 2d 81 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979). This is so because the master is in a better position to make determinations of fact, having seen the witnesses and listened to the testimony. The trial court will not overturn the master’s findings unless they are clearly errone…
Previewing 3 of 13 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence