FREDERICK GARMAN, 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 court affirmed the lower court's decision after the public defender moved to withdraw as counsel for the indigent appellant, finding the appeal to be wholly frivolous after the appellant failed to respond to an opportunity to raise additional points.
Yes, the appeal is wholly frivolous, and the public defender's motion to withdraw is granted, with the order or judgment appealed being 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 defenders' 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 failed to respond thereto on consideration thereof upon full examination of the proceedings we conclude that the appeal is wholly frivolous.”
Describes the procedural steps taken by the court to ensure the appellant's rights were protected and the basis for finding the appeal frivolous.
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. The court deferred ruling on the motion, provided the appellant…
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 Indigent Defendants 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 defenders’ 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 failed to respond 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
-
Firestone v. Time, Inc., 231 So. 2d 862 (Fla. 4th DCA 1970)…here the opposing party must prove his claim or defense from what he can draw from the other party. Bozant v. Bank of New York, 2 Cir. 1946, 156 F. 2d 787. The summary judgment procedure is not a trial by affidavits. Durkin v. Morgan, Fla.App.1969, 227 So. 2d 231. Ample opportunity should be granted to the opposing party to justify his opposition. RCP Rule 1.510(f) provides that: “If it appears from the affidavits of a party opposing the motion that he cannot for reasons stated present by affidavit facts es…
-
Gentile v. Abadessa, 267 So. 2d 344 (Fla. 4th DCA 1972)…ssue was presented on a material fact, i. e., whether appellees had either consented to, or acquiesced in, or ratified this modification of the purchase contract. That issue was improperly decided on summary judgment. Durkin v. Morgan, Fla.App.1969, 227 So. 2d 231. The judgment is reversed and this cause remanded for further proceedings consistent herewith. Reversed and remanded. REED, C. J., and WALDEN, J., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967)