J. C. BARBER, BERNARD BRINSON, AND EUGENE PETERSON, APPELLANTS,
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.
This case involves three appellants charged with breaking and entering with intent to commit a felony. The appellate court reviewed their convictions and found no errors, affirming the judgments.
The appellate court found no errors committed by the trial court during the proceedings against the appellants.
“We have reviewed the records on appeal in light of the issues raised by the appellants in their briefs together with the arguments made in support of the contentions of appellants for reversal.”
This quote establishes that the appellate court conducted a thorough review of the case based on the arguments presented by the appellants.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellants J. C. Barber, Bernard Brinson, and Eugene Peterson were charged with breaking and entering two business premises in Havana, Florida, with t…
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 Breaking And Entering With Intent To Commit A Felony cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellants were charged with breaking and entering the Flint River Mills Feed Store and the Havana Motor Company with intent to commit a felony. Both of these business premises are located in Havana, Gadsden County, Florida. The offense occurred on June 26, 1968. The appellants, Brinson and Barber, were jointly tried, whereas appellant Peterson was afforded a separate trial.
Appellant Brinson was sentenced to serve a term of six years imprisonment; appellant Barber was sentenced to a term of seven years; and appellant Peterson was sentenced to a term of ten years.
We have reviewed the records on appeal in light of the issues raised by the appellants in their briefs together with the arguments made in support of the contentions of appellants for reversal. Upon such consideration, we are of the view that no error y/as committed by the court below during the trial of these defendants.
Accordingly, the judgments of conviction being reviewed herein are affirmed.
CARROL, DONALD K., Acting C. J., and WIGGINTON and SPECTOR, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Peterson v. State, 237 So. 2d 223 (Fla. 1st DCA 1970)…ion to set aside and vacate his conviction for breaking and entering with intent to commit grand larceny. Appellant’s conviction, along with those of his accomplices, was affirmed by this court on direct appeal. See Barber et al. v. State, Fla.App., 226 So. 2d 35. The order now being reviewed recites as its basis that the grounds asserted by appellant in his motion to vacate were matters which were or could have been raised in appellant’s direct appeal to this court. We agree with the able trial judge. Eac…
-
W. W. GAY Mech. Contractors, Inc. v. Case, 275 So. 2d 570 (Fla. 1st DCA 1973)…ay notice called for by F.S. 713.06(2) (a), F. S.A., but contends that such time is not important since no sums were “properly” paid by the owner. In construing the 45-day notice statutory provision, this court held in Trowbridge, Inc. v. Hathaway, 226 So. 2d 35 (1 Fla.App.1969), that the “purpose of the notice to the owner served by one not in privity with the owner is to impound money that would otherwise be paid to the contractor.” Gay was not in privity with Food Fair; obviously, it was looking to Evans…
-
Trowbridge, Inc. v. Hathaway, 233 So. 2d 129 (Fla. 1970)…PER CURIAM. Because of an apparent conflict of decisions we issued a writ of certiorari to review the decision of .the District Court of Appeal in Trowbridge, Inc. v. Hathaway, 226 So. 2d 35 (1st Dist.Ct.App.Fla.1969). After hearing oral argument and consideration of the record and briefs we find that the writ was improvidently issued and should be discharged. However, compare Crane Co. v. Fine, 221 So. 2d 145 (Fla. 1969), where the rec…