GEORGE STANLEY, 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 court held that the appellant's contentions were without merit and affirmed the conviction and sentence.
Appellant was indicted, tried, and convicted of statutory rape of a child under ten years of age. Upon a jury recommendation of mercy, he was sentence…
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 Statutory Rape cases and more on FLexlaw
The appellant was indicted, tried and convicted of statutory rape of a child under ten years of age. Upon a jury recommendation of mercy, the appellant was sentenced to 99 years. He appeals a judgment of conviction and sentence.
The appellant urges a reversal upon three grounds, i. e., (1) that his confession should have been suppressed because of the failure of the arresting officer to take him without delay before a committing magistrate; (2) that the jury was not fully instructed because the trial judge failed to define the offense of assault with intent to commit rape, an offense included within that charged in the indictment; and (3) that the trial judge, through the bailiff, instructed the jury outside the presence of the appellant.
Each of the appellant’s contentions has been carefully considered and found to be without merit. It would serve no useful purpose, except to lengthen this opinion, to delineate the details of the offense or to discuss the reasons why this court feels that the testimony and evidence sustain the conviction and that the claimed errors are insufficient to warrant a reversal.
Accordingly, the judgment of conviction and sentence is affirmed.
Affirmed.
HORTON, C. J., and PEARSON and CARROLL, CHAS., JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Crum v. State, 172 So. 2d 24 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965)…he propriety of admitting into evidence the statement of the accused, first there is no requirement in this State that an accused be taken before a committing magistrate before a statement can be taken from him. See: Stanley v. State, Fla.App. 1960, 124 So. 2d 743; Leach v. State, Fla.1961, 132 So. 2d 329. It is apparent that the accused was advised of his constitutional rights prior to the execution of the formal statement. Therefore, -we find no error in the admission of same in evidence. Counsel for the ap…
-
Outten v. State, 197 So. 2d 594 (Fla. 2d DCA 1967)…ssible if voluntarily made, and is not the product of the detention.” The Florida cases, while not precisely in point, incline by inference toward support of the foregoing rule in C.J.S. — that is, as a general rule. Stanley v. State, Fla.App.1960, 124 So. 2d 743; Leach v. State, Fla.1961, 132 So. 2d 329; Dawson v. State, Fla.1962, 139 So. 2d 408; Young v. State, Fla.1962, 140 So. 2d 97; Romanello v. State, Fla.App.1964, 160 So. 2d 529; Gore v. State, Fla.App.1964, 163 So. 2d 37; and Sharretts v. State, Fla.…
-
Stanley v. State, 346 So. 2d 624 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See: Stanley v. State, 124 So. 2d 743 (Fla. 3d DCA 1960); Baxley v. State, 192 So. 2d 510 (Fla. 1st DCA 1966); Houser v. United States, 508 F. 2d 509 (8th Cir. 1974).…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence