ANTHONY T. STANLEY, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
ANTHONY T. STANLEY, APPELLANT,
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
538 So. 2d 1390
Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1989)
Caution
Cited by 10 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
None of the grounds asserted by the defendant for reversal of his conviction present either error or harm. See M.H. v. State, 538 So. 2d 1389 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). We remand the cause, however, to the trial court for the purposes (a) of correcting the judgment so as accurately to reflect the offense of which the appellant was found guilty and (b) of making the required written findings in support of the determination that Stanley is an habitual offender. See Link v. State, 537 So. 2d 696 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Watson v. Builders Square, Inc., 563 So. 2d 721 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990)…e can only conclude that the jury failed to consider all the elements of her damages. See Griffis v. Hill, 230 So. 2d 143 (Fla. 1970). As we stated in Calloway v. Dania Jai Alai Palace, Inc., 560 So. 2d 808 (4th DCA 1990) (quoting Rivera v. Aldrich, 538 So. 2d 1390, 1392 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)), “it is more than merely conceivable that the jury ‘interwove the issues and liability and damages on the jury form in an inconsistent way, suggestive of a compromise on liability, possible confusion on the law of damages,…
-
Broward Cnty. Sch. Bd. v. Dombrosky, 579 So. 2d 748 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)…It is highly probable that the jury was unable to decide with certainty who was at fault thus compromising the verdict which evenly apportioned negligence. See also, Rowland v. Signal Construction Co., 549 So. 2d 1380 (Fla.1989); Rivera v. Aldrich, 538 So. 2d 1390 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). In the instant case there is some suggestion from the hotly contested evidence of liability that the jury may have compromised on the verdict, especially in light of the jury’s decision to give a small award of damages to Dombros…
-
Calloway v. Dania JAI Alai Palace, Inc., 560 So. 2d 808 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990)…r to trip. Both sides presented conflicting expert testimony. It is highly probable that the jury was unable to decide with certainty who was at fault thus compromising the verdict which evenly apportioned negligence. Here, as in Rivera v. Aldrich, 538 So. 2d 1390, 1392 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989), the liability of the parties was equivocal, with the result that it is more than merely conceivable that the jury “interwove the issues of liability and damages on the verdict form in an inconsistent way, suggestive of a co…
Previewing 3 of 10 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Ira Link v. State, 537 So. 2d 696 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)
- Hennessy v. State, 537 So. 2d 696 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)
- M.H. v. State, 538 So. 2d 1389 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)