MARION CANTOR, APPELLANT,

v.

PETER MATOZZO, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By (11 total)

• State v. Hart, 632 So. 2d 134 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994)
  …nted on the basis that the verdict was contrary to the weight of evidence. However, since “the policy of the appellate rules is that criminal and civil appeals are to be treated alike, except for matters unique to criminal cases,” State v. Williams, 444 So. 2d 434, 439 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983), we have looked to a civil case for guidance in this issue. In Smith v. Brown, 525 So. 2d 868 (Fla.1988), the trial court granted the defendant’s motion for a new trial on the ground that the verdict was against the manifest…
• Lopez v. State, 638 So. 2d 931 (Fla. 1994)
  …72 (Fla.1980). These decisions were premised explicitly or implicitly upon the rationale that such cross-appeals were not authorized by the appellate rules. None of these cases mentioned either Mclnnes or McKinney. Thereafter, in State v. Williams, 444 So. 2d 434 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983), the Third District Court of Appeal considered the issue in more depth. The court analyzed Mclnnes and McKinney and acknowledged that the latter stood as controlling authority for the proposition that a criminal defendant was perm…
• State v. McADAMS, 559 So. 2d 601 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990)
  …in a criminal case can cross-appeal the court’s refusal to suppress a' portion of the evidence after the State appeals the same order granting partial suppression. Although State v. Ferguson, 405 So. 2d 294 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981) and State v. Williams, 444 So. 2d 434 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983) deny such cross-appeal, we disagree. While it is true that the defendant has no right to appeal a non-final order under the provisions of Rule 9.140(b)(1) and initially invoke the court’s jurisdiction, such rule does not, by its t…

Authorities Cited

• Palardy v. Vladimar Igrec, 388 So. 2d 1053 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980)