DANIEL GARNICKI, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
DANIEL GARNICKI, APPELLANT,
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
733 So. 2d 595
Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1999)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 1 case
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See § 924.051(7), Fla. Stat. (1997); Hallberg v. State, 649 So. 2d 1355 (Fla.1994); State v. DiGuilio, 491 So. 2d 1129 (Fla.1986); Collins v. State, 496 So. 2d 997 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986), review denied, 506 So. 2d 1040 (Fla.1987).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
LEE v. Oceans Casino Cruises, Inc., 983 So. 2d 791 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008)…use of discretion standard. Robinson v. Bucci, 828 So. 2d 478, 481 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002). The trial court abuses its discretion when it grants a new trial in reliance on an error that is neither preserved nor fundamental. Conklin Shows, Inc. v. Llanos, 733 So. 2d 595 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999). Even if plaintiffs counsel improperly impeached defendants’ expert witness, we believe a new trial is not warranted. In KMart Corp. v. Hayes, 707 So. 2d 957, 957 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998), we stated that “a new trial cannot be granted…
Authorities Cited
- State v. DiGUILIO, 491 So. 2d 1129 (Fla. 1986)
- Hallberg v. State, 649 So. 2d 1355 (Fla. 1994)
- Collins v. State, 496 So. 2d 997 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986)