RALPH A. RITTEMAN, APPELLANT,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION, APPELLEE
RALPH A. RITTEMAN, APPELLANT,
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION, APPELLEE
565 So. 2d 838
Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (1990)
Negative Treatment
Cited by 22 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
In this appeal of a final order from the Department of Environmental Regulation, the appellant argues there was insufficient evidence that the area at issue was within the Department’s jurisdiction. We affirm the finding of jurisdiction given the competent and substantial evidence in the record that the area falls within the landward extent of state waters. The remaining issues are without merit.
AFFIRMED.
BOOTH, SMITH and ZEHMER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (11 total)
-
Slawson v. Fast Food Enters., 671 So. 2d 255 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)…v. Fassnacht, 635 So. 2d 142, 144 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1994) (Altenbernd, J., concurring and dissenting). This obvious fairness results from the traditional rule that a lawyer is usually entitled to argue the applicable law to the jury. Williams v. State, 565 So. 2d 838 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990); and Taylor v. State, 330 So. 2d 91 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976). Although these are criminal cases, the principle is no less applicable to civil cases as to law the court has decided is applicable to the action and which affects the issu…
-
British Robinson v. State, 575 So. 2d 699 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)…e. Finally, appellant’s double jeopardy argument is unavailing, if for no other reason because the sexual battery and the aggravated battery were separate and distinct acts: appellant sexually abused and then beat the victim. See Williams v. State, 565 So. 2d 838 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990). As to the other points and contentions made by appellant, we find any error to be harmless under State v. DiGuilio, 491 So. 2d 1129 (Fla.1986). The judgments of conviction and sentences appealed are AFFIRMED. BARFIELD and WOLF…
-
KIO v. State, 624 So. 2d 744 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993)…action.” Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.701(d)7. This provision was construed as evincing legislative intent to limit scoring of victim injury to once per victim, regardless of the number of counts or types of injuries inflicted. For example, in Williams v. State, 565 So. 2d 838 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990), review denied, 576 So. 2d 295 (Fla.1991), the appellant had been convicted of burglary of a dwelling, sexual battery involving serious physical force, petit theft, and aggravated battery. All of the offenses were committed in th…
Previewing 3 of 11 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence