ALFRED LINUS DE MARIOS, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
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.
The appellate court affirmed a conviction for breaking and entering with intent to commit a felony and grand larceny, finding no merit in the appellant's eight points of error.
No, the assignments of error are without merit.
“the assignments of error are without merit, and that the judgment appealed from must be affirmed.”
This quote establishes the court's conclusion regarding the appellant's arguments and the ultimate outcome of the appeal.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe appellant was charged with breaking and entering with intent to commit a felony and grand larceny. He was convicted on both counts and sentenced t…
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.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Breaking And Entering With Intent To Commit A Felony cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellant was convicted on an information charging him with the offenses of breaking and entering with intent to commit a felony, and grand larceny. On the trial he was convicted on the two counts, and sentenced to ten years on the first count and five years on the second, to run consecutively.
This court, after having heard oral argument, and having examined the record on appeal and considered the eight points raised in appellant’s brief in the light of the ten assignments of error, is of the opinion that the assignments of error are without merit, and that the judgment appealed from must be affirmed. No new or novel questions are presented, and no useful purpose would be served by a detailed statement of the numerous points raised and the respective arguments thereon.
Affirmed.
CARROLL, CPIAS. C. J., and HORTON and PEARSON, JJ., concur.