RANDOLPH VEIGL, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 1992-04-21
No. 91-2740
Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and BASKIN and GERSTEN, JJ.
596 So. 2d 532 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1992) Positive Treatment
Cited by 1 case

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See State v. Evans, 394 So. 2d 1068 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981); Williams v. State, 796 S.W. 2d 793 (Tex.Ct.App.1990); see also State v. Horne, 399 So. 2d 49 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); S.T.N. v. State, 474 So. 2d 884 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985).


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Jonas v. Landau, 679 So. 2d 20 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996)
    …Count II), and unjust enrichment (Count III). Because Counts II and III remain pending below, it is obvious that the dismissal of Count I is not appealable at this time. Mendez v. West Flagler Family Assoc., 303 So. 2d 1 (Fla.1974); Roper v. Wilcox, 596 So. 2d 532 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992); Lavey v. Tattoli, 491 So. 2d 1170 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986); One Thousand Oaks, Inc. v. Dade Sav. & Loan Ass’n, 417 So. 2d 1135 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982). Appeal dismissed.…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw