CHARLES MAXWELL HAYES, 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 affirmed a lower court's order after finding the defendant's appeal to be wholly frivolous, following the procedure outlined in Anders v. California for appointed counsel seeking to withdraw.
Yes, the appeal is wholly frivolous, the public defender's motion to withdraw is granted, and the lower court's order is affirmed.
“this court, proceeding in the manner outlined and recommended by the Supreme Court of the United States in Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493, having deferred ruling on a motion of the public defender to withdraw as counsel for the indigent defendant-appellant, and having furnished appellant with a copy of the public defender's memorandum brief, and having allowed the appellant a reasonable specified time within which to raise any points that he chose in support of his appeal, and the appellant having filed his response thereto, on consideration thereof upon full examination of the proceedings we conclude that the appeal is wholly frivolous.”
This quote outlines the procedural steps taken by the court to ensure the defendant's rights were protected before affirming the lower court's decision based on a frivolous appeal.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe public defender moved to withdraw as counsel for the indigent defendant-appellant, arguing the appeal was frivolous. The court allowed the defenda…
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 Anders V. California Procedure cases and more on FLexlaw
This court, proceeding in the manner outlined and recommended by the Supreme Court of the United States in Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493, having deferred ruling on a motion of the public defender to withdraw as counsel for the indigent defendant-appellant, and having furnished appellant with a copy of the public defender’s memorandum brief, and having allowed the appellant a reasonable specified time within which to raise any points that he chose in support of his appeal, and the appellant having filed his response thereto, on consideration thereof upon full examination of the proceedings we conclude that the appeal is wholly frivolous. Whereupon, the public defender’s said motion to withdraw is granted, and the order or judgment appealed is hereby affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Adams v. State, 443 So. 2d 1003 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983)…petition for review denied, 392 So. 2d 1380 (1981); Le Chateau Royal Corp. v. Puntaleo, 370 So. 2d 1155 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979); Bond v. Koscot Interplanetary, Inc., 246 So. 2d 631 (Fla. 4th DCA 1971); Florida Discount [*1006] Centers, Inc. v. Antinori, 226 So. 2d 693 (Fla. 2d DCA 1969). Thus, in order to constitute an investment contract, “the efforts made by those other than the investor must be the significant ones in comparison to those made by the investor.” Le Chateau Royal Corp. v. Pantaleo. Focusing on t…
-
Bond v. Koscot Interplanetary, Inc., 246 So. 2d 631 (Fla. 4th DCA 1971)…bited by Section 849.091, the contract embodying such scheme or plan would be unenforceable and void. M. Lippincott Mortgage Investment Co. of Fla. v. Childress, Fla.App.1967, 204 So. 2d 919; Florida Discount Centers, Inc. v. Antinori, Fla.App.1969, 226 So. 2d 693; Florida Discount Centers, Inc. v. Antinori, Fla.1970, 232 So. 2d 17; Local No. 234, etc. v. Henley & Beckwith, Inc., Fla.1953, 66 So. 2d 818; 7 Fla.Jur., Contracts §§ 59-72; and 17 Am.Jur.2d, Contracts, §§ 165— 180, 216-240. The foregoing citation…
-
Fla. Disc. Ctrs., Inc. v. Antinori, 232 So. 2d 17 (Fla. 1970)…to the conclusion that the decision of the District Court is correct, and we hereby adopt it as the decision of this Court. Therefore, the writ is hereby discharged. It is so ordered. ERVIN, C. J., and ROBERTS, CARLTON and ADKINS, JJ., concur. . 226 So. 2d 693 (Fla.App.2nd 1969). . 204 So. 2d 919 (Fla.App.1st 1968).…
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
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967)