LARRY BUSBY, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
This appeal is under the appellant’s motion to vacate or set aside judgment and sentence pursuant to Criminal Procedure Rule No. 1, F.S.A. ch. 924 Appendix. In view of the fact that the appellate courts of this State have already passed upon similar questions, suffice it to say that on the appellant’s appeal the Criminal Court of Record is reversed upon authority of King v. State, Fla.App.1963, 157 So.2d 440, Barker v. State, Fla.App.1964, 159 So.2d 676, and cases cited therein.
Accordingly, the judgment and sentence and the order denying relief pursuant to Criminal Procedure Rule No. 1 are reversed and this cause remanded with directions to grant appellant’s motion for a new trial without delay.
Reversed and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Stabinski, Funt & DE Oliveira, P.A. v. LAW Offs. OF Frank H. Alvarez, 490 So. 2d 159 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986)…actions at law which are subject to trial by jury. Machado v. Foreign Trade, Inc., 478 So. 2d 405 (Fla.3d DCA 1985); Barranco, Darlson, Daniel & Bluestein, P.A. v. Winner, 386 So. 2d 1277 (Fla.3d DCA 1980); Sork v. United Benefit Fire Insurance Co., 161 So. 2d 54 (Fla.3d DCA 1964). By definition, a jury is incapable of rendering a “verdict” in the form prescribed by Rowe, and there is surely no indication that the supreme court intended to impose such a requirement. The fact that the component of Rowe now be…
-
Franklin & Marbin, P.A. v. Mascola, 711 So. 2d 46 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)…tions at law which are subject to trial by jury. Machado v. Foreign Trade, Inc., 478 So. 2d 405 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985); Barranco, Darlson, Daniel & Bluestein, P.A. v. Winner, 386 So. 2d 1277 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980); Sork v. United Benefit Fire Insurance Co., 161 So. 2d 54 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964). By definition, a jury is incapable of rendering a ‘verdict’ in the form prescribed by Rowe, and there is surely no indication that the supreme court intended to impose such a requirement. The fact that the component of Rowe now b…
-
Riess v. Goldman, 196 So. 2d 184 (Fla. 3d DCA 1967)…. Attorney fees, generally, are not an item of cost. See: Ritters Hotel, Inc. v. Sidebotham, 142 Fla. 171, 194 So. 322; Ronlee, Inc v. P. M. Walker Co., Inc., Fla.App.1961, 129 So. 2d 175; Sork v. United Benefit Life Insurance Company, Fla.App.1964, 161 So2d 54; 8 Fla.Jur., Costs, § 38; 9 Fla.Jur., Damages, § 77; 25 C.J.S. Damages § 50c, p. 784. Therefore, the summary judgment here under review is hereby reversed and this cause is remanded to the trial court with instructions to reinstate the answer and c…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- King v. State, 157 So. 2d 440 (Fla. 2d DCA 1963)
- Barker v. State, 159 So. 2d 676 (Fla. 2d DCA 1964)