LEE FRANKLIN SMITH, 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 rape, finding no material error in the trial proceedings or the evidence presented. The jury recommended mercy, and the court imposed a sentence.
No material error was disclosed in the record or briefs, and the judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed.
“After examination of the record and briefs, this court is of the opinion that no material error is disclosed and that the judgment appealed from must be affirmed.”
This quote establishes the court's conclusion after reviewing the case materials.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe appellant was indicted, tried, and convicted in Dade County for the rape of his 17-year-old daughter. The jury recommended mercy, and the court se…
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 Fair Trial cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellant was indicted, tried and convicted in Dade County of raping his 17 year old daughter. In their verdict the jury recommended mercy. The court imposed a sentence for a designated term of years.
Appellant has prosecuted this appeal in proper person, while confined in the state penitentiary, and the appeal has been considered by this court without oral argument.
After examination of the record and briefs, this court is of the opinion that no material error is disclosed and that the judgment appealed from must be affirmed.
The evidence in this case appears clear and convincing, and fully sustains the verdict. Appellant was represented by able counsel at the trial. The record shows the case to have been fairly tried, and that the trial judge properly and adequately charged the jury on the law applicable to the case.
We have given full and careful consideration to the appellant’s claims of error as disclosed in his assignments of error and in the points dealt with in his brief, and we find that they are without merit.
Affirmed,
CARROLL, CHAS., C. J., HORTON and PEARSON, JJ., concur.