ERNEST EUGENE GRANT, APPELLANT,
v.
LOUIE L. WAINWRIGHT, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF CORRECTIONS, STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
ERNEST EUGENE GRANT, APPELLANT,
LOUIE L. WAINWRIGHT, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF CORRECTIONS, STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
219 So. 2d 60
Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (1969)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 4 cases
Opinion of the Court
Affirmed on authority of Schack v. State, 391 F.2d 593 (5th Cir. 1968), wherein appellant’s contention that he was denied proper dental treatment was rejected.
WIGGINTON, C. J., and CARROLL, DONALD K., and SPECTOR, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Betancourt v. State, 228 So. 2d 124 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969)…mstantial evidence may prove guilt when the circumstances are susceptible of only one reasonable interpreta- [*127] tion. See McBride v. State, Fla.App.1966, 191 So. 2d 70; Koenig v. State, Fla.App.1968, 214 So. 2d 627; Ponce v. State, Fla.App.1969, 219 So. 2d 60. The judgments appealed from are affirmed.…
-
Delgado v. State, 229 So. 2d 651 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969)…vidence is considered as circumstantial it is susceptible to no reasonable hypothesis except the guilt of the appellants. See McBride v. State, Fla.App.1966, 191 So. 2d 70; Koenig v. State, Fla.App.1968, 214 So. 2d 627; Ponce v. State, Fla.App.1969, 219 So. 2d 60; Betancourt v. State, above. Affirmed.…
Authorities Cited
- Schack v. State, 391 F.2d 593 (5th Cir. 1968)