NATHANIEL JETHRO HENDERSON, 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 court held that the appeal from the denial of a delayed motion for a new trial must be affirmed because no grounds were argued to show the trial court erred in denying the motion.
Defendant appealed the denial of his delayed motion for a new trial after a hearing on his petition for relief. The trial court found his right to app…
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 Petition For Relief cases and more on FLexlaw
The defendant, Nathaniel Jethro Henderson, appeals from the trial court’s denial of his delayed ntotion for a new trial following a hearing on his petition for relief filed pursuant to Criminal Procedure Rule No. One, F.S.A. ch. 924 Appendix.
A previous appeal from the summary denial of this petition filed by the appellant herein was reversed and remanded in order that a full evidentiary hearing might be held. See Henderson v. State, Fla.App. 1965, 174 So.2d 73. The trial court conducted a full evidentiary hearing and determined that the appellant’s right to appeal had been thwarted by the action of the public defender. At the conclusion of the hearing, the trial court allowed the appellant to make a delayed motion for a new trial. The grounds for the motion were that the judgment was contrary to the law and the evidence; that the defendant should have been entitled to a directed verdict of not guilty, and that the weight of the evidence was insufficient.
We have previously approved this procedure under Criminal Procedure Rule. No. One, where it is evident that it was in *873the best interest of justice and fairness. Jackson v. State, Fla.App.1964, 166 So.2d 194. Having proceeded in accordance therewith, the appellant’s only argument is directed to the proposition that the relief granted was incorrect and that he should have either been discharged completely, or granted a new trial. We note, however, that this appeal is from the order which denied the delayed motion for new trial and that no grounds are argued to show that the trial court erred in denying the delayed motion for new trial.
Inasmuch as the appellant has now abandoned the grounds upon which the appeal was originally taken (Rule 3.7(i), Florida Appellate Rules, 31 F.S.A., and we find that there has been no showing of reversible error in the trial court’s order denying the delayed motion for new trial, the judgment is therefore
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Simpson v. State, 211 So. 2d 862 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968)…hich were claimed by Simpson in the federal [*866] courts, i. e., a denial of a right to appeal or move for a new trial, when properly-raised. See Criminal Procedure Rule No. One; Henderson v. State, Fla.App.1965, 174 So. 2d 73; Indem. Fla.App.1966, 183 So. 2d 872; and Jackson v. State, Fla.App. 1964, 166 So. 2d 194; Indem. Fla.App.1965, 177 So. 2d 353; Tolar v. State, Fla.App. 1967, 196 So. 2d 1; Nelson v. State, Fla.App. 1968, 208 So. 2d 506. The matters relied upon by the federal courts had never been rais…
-
Murray v. State, 191 So. 2d 292 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966)…ntiary matters and incidents at the trial, and rule thereon as the merits of the several contentions may require” — does not authorize the filing of a “delayed” motion for new trial. A contrary view was expressed in Henderson v. State, Fla.App.1966, 183 So. 2d 872. We have determined that said view is not warranted by the hdlding in the Jackson case. The Jackson case, supra, held that the defendant may urge those matters which he could have raised on a direct appeal from his conviction and sentence as ground…
-
Johnson v. State, 204 So. 2d 224 (Fla. 3d DCA 1967)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed on the authority of Simpson v. State, Fla.App. 1964, 164 So. 2d 224; Henderson v. State, Fla.App.1966, 183 So. 2d 872; Wainwright v. Simpson, 5th Cir.1966, 360 F. 2d 307.…
Authorities Cited
- Jackson v. State, 166 So. 2d 194 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964)
- Henderson v. State, 174 So. 2d 73 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965)