CLARENCE WAYNE FEAGANS, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
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.
The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motions for continuance, judgment of acquittal, or new trial.
Appellant was convicted of second degree murder after a jury trial. Appellant appealed, raising contentions regarding the denial of motions for contin…
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.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Recantation Of Testimony cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant was adjudged guilty and sentenced to 17 years imprisonment for the lesser included offense of second degree murder, after a jury trial on a charge of first degree murder. It is appellant’s first contention on appeal that the trial court abused its discre tion by denying appellant’s motion to continue the trial. We find this contention to be without merit. The granting or denial of a motion for continuance is within the trial court’s judicial discretion and will not be disturbed by an appellate court absent a palpable abuse of discretion. Lusk v. State, 446 So. 2d 1038, 1040-41 (Fla.), and cases cited therein, cert. denied, — U.S. -, 105 S.Ct. 229, 83 L.Ed.2d 158 (1984).
Appellant’s next contention is that the trial court erred in denying his motion for judgment of acquittal. We find the motion was properly denied since, under Florida law, a motion for judgment of acquittal should not be granted unless there is no legally sufficient evidence upon which the jury could find the defendant guilty. T.J.T. v. State, 460 So. 2d 508 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984); Greger v. State, 458 So. 2d 858 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984); Fletcher v. State, 428 So. 2d 667 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982), review denied, 430 So. 2d 452 (Fla.1983); Knight v. State, 392 So. 2d 337 (Fla. 3d DCA), review denied, 399 So. 2d 1143 (Fla.1981).
As to appellant’s last point, we hold that the trial court did not abuse its broad discretion in denying appellant’s motion for a new trial on the basis of the recantation of testimony by a prosecution witness. Since the court determined the recantation testimony was not credible, it was the court’s duty to deny the motion for a new trial. Henderson v. State, 135 Fla. 548, 185 So. 625 (1938); see Mollica v. State, 374 So. 2d 1022, 1025 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979); Borgess v. State, 455 So. 2d 488 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984).
No reversible error having been demonstrated, the judgment and sentence appealed are affirmed.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Anderson v. State, 504 So. 2d 1270 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)…e the property of others and their total value to be more than $100. Since a motion for judgment of acquittal should not be granted unless there is no legally sufficient evidence upon which the jury could find the defendant guilty, Feagans v. State, 487 So. 2d 408, 409 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986), the denial of the motion as to the grand theft charge herein is affirmed. Affirmed. BOOTH, C.J., and WENTWORTH, J., concur.…
-
Wilson v. State, 776 So. 2d 347 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001)…o. 2d 107 (Fla.1997); Barwick v. State, 660 So. 2d 685, 694 (Fla.1995); Wyatt v. State, 755 So. 2d 671 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999). . Hoffman v. State, 708 So. 2d 962 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998); Rosso v. State, 505 So. 2d 611 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987); Feagans v. State, 487 So. 2d 408 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986). . Standard Jury Instruction 3.01 provides: If the defendant helped another person or persons [commit] [attempt to commit] a crime, the defendant is a principal and must be treated as if [he][she] had done all the things the oth…
-
Cammarano v. State, 602 So. 2d 1369 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992)…evidentiary hearing is necessarily required. If the court should conclude, based on a review of the record, that Potenzo’s recantation as evidenced by the affidavit is not credible, then the motion for new trial should be denied. Feagans v. State, 487 So. 2d 408 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986). In this case Potenzo’s testimony at trial was that he and Cammarano decided to rob the bar and kill anyone present. To insure that the car (Cammarano’s car) would not be seen at the bar, Cammarano parked his car some blocks from…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Lusk v. State, 446 So. 2d 1038 (Fla. 1984)
- Henderson v. State, 135 Fla. 548 (Fla. 1938)
- T.J.T. v. State, 460 So. 2d 508 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)
- Bridges v. State, 392 So. 2d 337 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)
- Knight v. State, 392 So. 2d 337 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)
- Mollica v. State, 374 So. 2d 1022 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979)
- Fletcher v. State, 428 So. 2d 667 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)
- Greger v. State, 458 So. 2d 858 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)
- Borgess v. State, 455 So. 2d 488 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984)