RALPH AMAN, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 4th DCA | 1986-03-12
No. 85-633
LETTS, GLICKSTEIN and DELL, JJ. concur.
486 So. 2d 15 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (1986)

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.


Holding

The court held that there was no error in denying the appellant's motion for severance from his co-defendant and no error in denying his motion for judgment of acquittal.


Facts & Procedural History

Appellant was convicted of trafficking in cocaine. Evidence showed his car was used for delivery, he handled the cocaine, and he made comments about i…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a conviction for trafficking in cocaine. We affirm, holding that there was no error in denial of appellant’s motion for severance for trial separate from his co-defendant. McCray v. State, 416 So. 2d 804 (Fla.1982). The Court’s language in O’Callaghan v. State, 429 So. 2d 691, 694-695 (Fla.1983), succinctly responds to the arguments made here. We also hold that there was no error in denying appellant’s motion for judgment of acquittal.

The fact some of the evidence conflicted does not wipe out the evidence that tends to support the state’s charge, and render the evidence insufficient. See Abbott v. State, 334 So. 2d 642, 647 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976), certiorari denied, 431 U.S. 968, 97 S.Ct. 2926, 53 L.Ed.2d 1064 (1977).

There was evidence here that appellant’s car was used to deliver the cocaine. Appellant was the driver; he got the bag out of the back seat area of his car and handed it to his co-defendant; he went into Mr. Bever’s house with his co-defendant, even though he hardly knew Mr. Bever. Appellant commented that the cocaine was of excellent quality; and he stayed at Bever’s to the bitter end of the transaction. These facts were sufficient to justify denial of judgment of acquittal. The jury had enough from which to determine whether he trafficked in cocaine when it was in his car, and when he got it out of his car and handed it to his co-defendant; and whether at the time he knew what was in the bag.

LETTS, GLICKSTEIN and DELL, JJ. concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw