ADAM KEITH HORNE
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA

Fla. 1st DCA | 2023-02-22
No. 2021-2002
Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (2023)

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

Competent, substantial evidence supports the convictions, the sentence is legal, and no arguable issues exist on appeal.


Headnotes

[1] In an Anders review, when counsel finds no arguable issues on appeal, the appellate court must independently review the record to determine whether any arguable issues ex…

Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

Horne and an accomplice encountered an elderly woman entering a store; after she offered them a ride to their hotel, they committed kidnapping, robber…

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.


Per_curiam
Per Curiam

PER CURIAM.

Adam Keith Horne appeals the judgment and sentence entered following his convictions for kidnapping, robbery with a deadly weapon, and grand theft of a motor vehicle. The victim, an elderly woman, encountered Horne and his accomplice as she was entering a store to shop for groceries. The victim offered to help them after learning they needed a ride to their hotel. Horne and his accomplice accepted her assistance, then proceeded to commit the acts that resulted in the criminal convictions we review today.

Our independent Anders1 review of the record in this case reveals no arguable issues on appeal. Competent, substantial

evidence supports Horne’s convictions, and the trial court imposed a legal sentence for each of those convictions.

As for the various issues raised in Horne’s pro se brief,2 we note that almost all are unpreserved, and none constitute reversible or fundamental error. AFFIRMED.

OSTERHAUS, BILBREY, and NORDBY, JJ., concur. _____________________________

Footnotes
1 Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967).

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw