ROBIN C. BERG, 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 the denial of a motion for post-conviction relief, finding no errors in the lower court's proceedings. The appellant had pleaded guilty to robbery, was placed on probation, and later had his probation revoked after admitting to violations.
No, the trial court did not err in denying the appellant's motion for post-conviction relief.
“This is an appeal from a final judgment denying motion for post-conviction relief from a previous judgment of guilty of robbery. We affirm.”
Establishes the nature of the appeal and the court's immediate decision.
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 pleaded guilty to robbery in 1963 and was placed on probation for twenty years. In 1967, his probation was revoked after he pleaded guil…
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 Probation Revocation cases and more on FLexlaw
This is an appeal from a final judgment denying motion for post-conviction relief from a previous judgment of guilty of robbery. We affirm.
Appellant’s attorney, the public defender, has failed and neglected to state any assignment of error relied on for reversal. His point presented by brief falls within the assignment that “the court erred in denying the defendant’s motion to vacate and set-aside judgment and sentence.” The defendant was represented by the public defender when he entered his plea of guilty to the charge on December 2, 1963; after pre-sentence investigation, he was placed on probation for a period of twenty years on March 16, 1964; when represented by the public defender, his probation was revoked after plea of guilty to violating the terms of probation on March 20, 1967.
When the defendant was represented by the public defender, the trial court held a full evidentiary hearing on the defendant’s motion for post-conviction relief, at which *455hearing the motion for relief was denied, from which denial this appeal has been prosecuted by his counsel, the public defender.
No error having been made to appear, the judgment appealed from is affirmed.
Affirmed.
CROSS and REED, JJ., concur.