CLINTON GERALD BROWN, 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 trial judge did not err in denying a continuance for the defendant to obtain private counsel and that the judge's suggestion to raise bail was justified.
The appellant was charged with robbery, found guilty after waiving a jury trial, and sentenced. He appealed, arguing the judge erred by denying a cont…
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 Bail cases and more on FLexlaw
The appellant, Clinton Gerald Brown, was charged by information with robbery. He pleaded not guilty and waived trial by jury. Upon trial, the court found him guilty of robbery and sentenced him to eight years in the state penitentiary.
Appellant’s first contention on appeal is that the trial judge committed reversible error in failing to grant a continuance of the trial so that the defendant could make further efforts to obtain private counsel. We cannot agree. The appellant was represented by private counsel for a period of time prior to trial. His private counsel was allowed to withdraw and the public defender was appointed to represent him at trial. The record clearly shows that appellant’s constitutional rights were fully protected and that the court did not abuse his discretion in denying the continuance to the defendant. Jarvis v. State, 115 Fla. 320, 156 So. 310.
Appellant’s second contention is that the trial judge erred in suggesting that if a continuance were to be granted that the bail bond would be raised from One Thousand to Ten Thousand Dollars to cover both cases. We find this contention to be without merit. The record shows good cause for the position taken by the trial judge with regard to increasing the amount of the bond. The court may, for good cause, increase the amount of bail or require additional bail. 4 Fla.Jur. Bail and Recognizance, §§ 32, 33, 35. In the case sub judice there was only an expression by the trial judge that he was inclined to raise the amount of the bond.
We have carefully considered the record on appeal, briefs and arguments of counsel and have concluded that no harmful error has been made to appear. Accordingly, the judgment and sentence appealed are affirmed.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
HOY v. State, 353 So. 2d 826 (Fla. 1977)…n could not be assigned as error, but now in this state such decisions are reviewable by appellate tribunals, but the ruling of the trial court will not be disturbed in the absence of a clear abuse of discretion. [Cases cited.]” Cf. Brown v. State, 224 So. 2d 789 (Fla. 3rd DCA, 1969), Kish v. State, 192 So. 2d 315 (Fla. 3rd DCA, 1966). We find no merit in appellant’s contention that the trial court erroneously restricted his cross-examination of Dennis Bender, but rather, a review of the record supports app…
-
Barrow v. State, 940 So. 2d 1235 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)…te him in future criminal proceedings. St. George v. State, 564 So. 2d 152, 154 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990). Thus, Wright could not assert his privilege against self-incrimination after the statute of limitations ran in July 1995. See Markey v. Jae Sam Lee, 224 So. 2d 789 (Fla. 2d DCA 1969). Id. at 551. The decision in MacFarland was resolved against the defendant in large part because of evidence received at the eviden-tiary hearing on the defendant’s rule 3.850 motion that demonstrated that the defendant maintain…
-
Robinson v. State, 325 So. 2d 427 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976)…56 So. 2d 29 (Fla.App. 3rd 1971). A denial of a motion for continuance based on a request for additional time to secure counsel has been held not to be an abuse of discretion. Fuller v. Wainwright, 268 So. 2d 431 (Fla.App. 4th 1972); Brown v. State, 224 So. 2d 789 (Fla.App. 3rd 1969). We hold the trial court committed no error. The Defendant’s second point on appeal is that the trial court erred in admitting in evidence a package containing the heroin which was the substance of the alleged violation. Defenda…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Jarvis v. State, 115 Fla. 320 (Fla. 1934)