CLIFFORD HARDY, JR., APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
CLIFFORD HARDY, JR., APPELLANT,
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
228 So. 2d 440
Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (1969)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 4 cases
Opinion of the Court
Appellant’s CrPR 1.850, 33 F.S.A. motion was considered by the trial court to be frivolous and was denied.
After having considered the briefs and the record, we are compelled to affirm the trial court’s order denying appellant’s motion.
LILES, A. C. J., and PIERCE and MANN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Jeri Lee Haugland and Nils Richard Haugland v. State, 374 So. 2d 1026 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)…l credit card as charged in the information. The fact that the defendant was also charged in the same count with unlawfully receiving another credit card which was not adequately proven on this record does not change this result. See Smith v. State, 228 So. 2d 440, 442 (Fla. 2d DCA 1969). Moreover, the element of scienter or guilty knowledge was properly inferable from the defendants’ simultaneous possession of other items of stolen property. See State v. Graham, 238 So. 2d 618, 621 (Fla.1970). We, accordingl…
-
Hornbrook v. State, 321 So. 2d 127 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975)…in appellant’s truck bore that serial number. In sum there was an absence of proof to connect any of the stolen units with the units found in appellant’s truck. As stated by the District Court of Appeal, Second District in Smith v. State, Fla.App., 228 So. 2d 440 (1969): “The applicable law in this matter is well stated in Armstrong v. State, 1932, 107 Fla. 494, 496, 145 So. 212, 213: ‘This court is committed to the doctrine that a verdict of guilt of felony should not be upheld when based on guesswork or…