CHARLES THOMAS HUNTER, 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 a conviction for assault with intent to commit rape, finding no reversible error despite issues with the appellant's trial and appellate counsel. The court reviewed the entire record to ensure justice was served.
No, the trial court did not commit reversible error. The evidence was more than adequate to support the conviction for assault with intent to commit rape.
“These objections are lost.”
Establishes that procedural defaults by trial counsel prevent appellate review of certain issues.
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's trial counsel failed to object to the prosecuting witness remaining in the courtroom after the rule was invoked and to a prejudicial r…
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 Failure To Object cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellant’s privately engaged trial counsel neglected to object to the trial court’s failure, upon invocation of the rule, to require the prosecuting witness to leave the courtroom during the trial and to an allegedly prejudicial remark made by the state attorney in opening argument. These objections are lost.
Because the assistant public defender appointed to represent Hunter on appeal neglected to communicate with him for many months and, so far as the record shows, took no action of any consequence, and because the attorney appointed by the trial court upon discharge of the assistant public defender was so late in filing his brief and did so then only after a pointed reminder from this court, we have reviewed the entire record lest Hunter think this the us*354ual standard of justice in the Second Appellate District.
The trial court properly admitted Hunter’s statement as a voluntary one. The evidence more than adequately supports Hunter’s conviction of assault with intent to commit rape. It would in fact have supported a conviction of rape. The record is free from reversible error.
Affirmed.
LILES, C. J., and McNULTY, L, concur.