S.A., A JUVENILE, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 1984-11-06
No. 83-2269
Before HENDRY, BASKIN and JOR-GENSON, JJ.
458 So. 2d 405 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1984) Positive Treatment
Cited by 1 case

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Smith v. State, 441 So. 2d 1162 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983), pet. for rev. granted, No. 64,678 (Fla.1984); State v. Cruz, 426 So. 2d 1308 (Fla. 2d DCA), pet. for rev. granted, No. 63,451 (Fla.1983). But see State v. Holliday, 431 So. 2d 309 (Fla. 1st DCA), pet. for rev. granted, No. 63,832 (Fla.1983); State v. Casper, 417 So. 2d 263 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982).


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • State v. Theodorus Borsje and Susan Borsje, 566 So. 2d 912 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990)
    …61). Not only did the judge allow the introduction of this ex parte evidence, but he also considered it in making his final judgment, over the objection of DOT. Black letter law has established that this constitutes reversible error. Cohan v. Cohan, 458 So. 2d 405 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984); McGuire v. McGuire, 140 So. 2d 354 (Fla. 2d DCA 1962). Even if we had not reversed this case on the ex parte communication issue, we would reverse on the second issue concern [*914] ing the establishment of the parties’ boundary…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw