ROY DUNNING, IN HIS INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY, APPELLANT,

v.

ROBERT PEREGOY, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By

• Hopkins v. State, 632 So. 2d 1372 (Fla. 1994)
  …ily related to the constitutional right to confrontation. Cf. Myles v. State, 602 So. 2d 1278,1281 (Fla.1992) (discussing the interrelation of the findings required by Maryland v. Craig and those required by section 92.54); see also Feller v. State, 617 So. 2d 1091, 1097 (Fla. 1st [*1376] DCA) (Zehmer, J., dissenting), review granted, 626 So. 2d 205 (Fla.1993). In the instant case, defense counsel’s “confrontation rights” objection necessarily called into question whether the statutory procedures had been fol…
• Sigmon v. State, 622 So. 2d 57 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993)
  …o find that the child witness would be traumatized, not by the courtroom generally, but by the presence of the defendant, [emphasis added] We conclude, however, that appellant has failed to preserve this issue for appellate review. Feller v. State, 617 So. 2d 1091 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993) (although defendant requested that he be present during videotaping of child victim’s testimony, he did not object to the trial court’s failure to make specific findings under section 92.53, Florida Statutes, and therefore failed…

  ← 1 / 2 →
• Haley Bascom Pippin v. State, 626 So. 2d 1091 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993)
  …trial signed by Appellant on June 10, 1988. Neither of these documents, however, appears in the record. As a preliminary matter, we observe that the allegations made in Appellant’s motion present a prima facie case for relief. See, Feller v. State, 617 So. 2d 1091, 1094 n. 3 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993); Cambrick v. State, 593 So. 2d 613, 614 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992). Since the trial court failed to attach the documents refuting Appellant’s claims, we must reverse and remand “for either attachment of those portions of the f…

Authorities Cited

• Tucker v. Resha, 610 So. 2d 460 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)