BERNARD MANGEL, APPELLANT,
v.
THE 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 appellant was convicted of unlawfully using a false address to obtain a prescription for a narcotic drug. He appealed, arguing the state failed to prove he gave a false address or obtained a narcotic drug. The appellate court affirmed the conviction, finding substantial competent evidence supported the trial court's decision.
Yes, the State proved both elements. There was substantial competent evidence to support the trial court's finding that the appellant gave a false address and obtained a narcotic drug.
“The verdict or judgment of guilt 'having arrived in this court with a pre-sumption of correctness”
Establishes the standard of review for the appellate court.
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 tried non-jury and convicted of unlawfully using a false address to obtain a prescription for a narcotic drug. He was sentenced to f…
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 Presumption Of Correctness Of Judgment cases and more on FLexlaw
The appellant was tried non-jury and convicted of unlawfully using a false address to obtain a prescription for a narcotic •drug, for which he was sentenced to five years in the State penitentiary. He appeals .and alleges error in the following particulars : That the State failed to prove appellant had given a false address within the ■meaning of § 398.19(1) (d), Fla.Stat., F.S. A., and the State did not establish that the .appellant obtained a narcotic drug.
The verdict or judgment of guilt 'having arrived in this court with a pre-sumption of correctness [see: Taylor v. State, 139 Fla. 542, 190 So. 691; 124 A.L.R. 835; Inman v. State, 139 Fla. 789, 191 So. 12; San Fratello v. State, Fla.App.1963, 154 So.2d 327], all inferences to be drawn from the evidence are to be in favor of the verdict or judgment of guilt. See: Cameron v. State, Fla.App.1959, 112 So.2d 864; Boyd v. State, Fla.App.1960, 122 So.2d 632. In examining the record in light of the foregoing principles there appears substantial competent evidence to support the trial court’s action. Therefore, it will be sustained.
Having failed to find reversible error in the conviction and judgment here under review, we hereby affirm.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Ira Douglas v. State, 214 So. 2d 653 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968)…nt and the cited statutes. In category four situations the lesser offense must be comprehended by the allegations of the information and supported by the proof.” Reversed with directions to discharge the appellant. . Mangel v. State, Fla.App.1965, 179 So. 2d 888. . McDonald v. State, 56 Fla. 74, 47 So. 485 (1908). . “§ 776.011. Principal in first degree.— Whoever commits any criminal offense against the state, whether felony or misdemeanor, or aids, abets, counsels, hires, or otherwise procures such offen…
-
Sylvia v. State, 210 So. 2d 286 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968)…in of this evidence was in conflict but, at this stage of the proceedings, all conflicts in' the evidence and all reasonable inferences therefrom are in favor of the verdict. Crum v. State, Fla.App.1965, 172 So. 2d 24; Mangel v. State, Fla.App.1965, 179 So. 2d 888; Walden v. State, Fla.App.1966, 191 So. 2d 68; Hennessy v. State, Fla.App.1967, 198 So. 2d 37. The first error complained of is that the trial court committed error in failing to grant a severance because of the antagonistic positions of the severa…
-
Ethridge v. State, 201 So. 2d 238 (Fla. 3d DCA 1967)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed on the authority of Mangel v. State, Fla.App.1965, 179 So. 2d 888.…
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
- Cameron v. State, 112 So. 2d 864 (Fla. 1st DCA 1959)
- Taylor v. State, 139 Fla. 542 (Fla. 1939)
- Fratello v. State, 154 So. 2d 327 (Fla. 2d DCA 1963)
- Boyd v. State, 122 So. 2d 632 (Fla. 1st DCA 1960)
- Inman v. State, 139 Fla. 789 (Fla. 1939)