EARTON DAVID JONES, 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.
Earton David Jones appealed his robbery conviction on two grounds: denial of counsel at a preliminary hearing under Coleman v. Alabama and insufficient evidence. The Florida appellate court affirmed the conviction, holding that Coleman v. Alabama was inapplicable in Florida and that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction as an aider and abettor.
The court held that Coleman v. Alabama is not applicable in Florida, that any error was waived by failure to raise it at trial or in post-trial motions, and that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction because Jones was at minimum an aider and abettor to the robbery.
[1] A defendant must timely raise the applicability of a constitutional right in the trial court to preserve the issue for appeal.
[2] Failure to object to the denial of counsel at a preliminary hearing, even if the denial violates a constitutional right, may constitute a waiver of that right.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“If the appellant and the others outside the automobile were not active participants in the robbery, they were certainly aiders and abettors.”
Establishes that the evidence was sufficient to sustain conviction on an aiding and abetting theory
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceJones and another person were outside an automobile accosting the victim and his brother with a gun. While they confronted the victims outside the veh…
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 Right To Counsel At Preliminary Hearing cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellant, defendant in the criminal court of record, appeals a robbery conviction. He contends error in two particulars: (1) that he was denied counsel at a preliminary hearing, citing Coleman v. Alabama, 399 U.S. 1, 90 S.Ct. 1999, 26 L.Ed.2d 387, and (2) that the evidence was insufficient to sustain the conviction.
As to the first point, the First District Court of Appeal of Florida has held, in Harrison v. Wainwright, Fla.App.1971, 243 So.2d 427, that Coleman v. Alabama, supra, is not applicable in Florida and we think this case disposes of this point adverse to the appellant. Further, no motion was made in the trial court, either during the trial or in post-trial motions, raising the applicability of the doctrine in Coleman v. Alabama, supra. And we hold that even if Coleman v. Alabama, supra, were to be followed in Florida, it would be incumbent on defense counsel in proceeding subsequent to the cited decision to at least call this principle [and any alleged error in a criminal proceeding] to the attention of a trial judge no later than the close of the .time for filing post-trial motions. See also: Miller v. State, Fla.App.1971, 246 So.2d 169. Compare Yakus v. *518United States, 321 U.S. 414, 64 S.Ct. 660, 88 L.Ed. 834; Michel v. Louisiana, 350 U.S. 91, 76 S.Ct. 158, 100 L.Ed. 83, wherein the Supreme Court of the United States has held that even a Federal constitutional right may be waived if not timely presented.
Turning to the other point on the sufficiency of the evidence, we find no merit in this contention in light of the evidence disclosing that the appellant and another were accosting the victim and his brother with a gun from outside of an automobile, at the time they were robbed by others within the automobile. If the appellant and the others outside the automobile were not active participants in the robbery, they were certainly aiders and abettors. Prather v. State, Fla.App.1966, 182 So.2d 273; Sotomayor v. State, Fla.App.1969, 224 So.2d 357; DeLaine v. State, Fla.App.1970, 230 So.2d 168; § 776.011, F.S.A.
Therefore, for the reasons above stated, the judgment of conviction and sentence thereon be and the same are hereby affirmed.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Thomas v. State, 249 So. 2d 510 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971)…nts to a police officer. No objection was made on this point during trial and no ruling obtained from the trial court and it may not be raised for the first time on appeal. See Silver v. State, Fla.1966, 188 So. 2d 300; Jones v. State, Fla.App.1971, 248 So. 2d 517, and Mahone v. State, Fla.App.1969, 222 So. 2d 769. Cf. James v. State, Fla.App.1969, 223 So. 2d 52. In addition, the record shows Caldwell was advised of his constitutional rights. The defendants on appeal next argue that “an unrelated subsequent…
-
Durcan v. State, 383 So. 2d 248 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)…to a jury; [*249] he executed the waiver; he saw the judge discharge the jury. We hold that it now comes too late to hear that he was deprived of his constitutional right to a jury trial. Sanford v. Rubin, 237 So. 2d 134 (Fla.1970); Jones v. State, 248 So. 2d 517 (Fla.3d DCA 1971); Clark v. State, 336 So. 2d 468 (Fla.2d DCA 1976); Ellison v. State, 349 So. 2d 731 (Fla.3d DCA 1977); Pegues v. State, 361 So. 2d 433 (Fla.1st DCA 1978); Clark v. State, 363 So. 2d 331 (Fla.1978); Rubin v. State, 368 So. 2d 69 (Fl…
-
Murray Rubin v. State, 368 So. 2d 69 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)…nk the trial judge was correct in refusing to entertain the motion, because it was untimely. This certainly was within his discretion. Counsel urges that a fundamental constitutional right cannot be waived; with this we do not agree. Jones v. State, 248 So. 2d 517 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971); Clark v. State, 336 So. 2d 468 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976); Ellison v. State, 349 So. 2d 731 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977); Pegues v. State, 361 So. 2d 433 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978). The other point, going to the sufficiency of the evidence, we find to b…
Previewing 3 of 10 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Yakus v. United States, 321 U.S. 414 (U.S. 1944)
- Michel v. Louisiana, 350 U.S. 91 (U.S. 1955)
- Coleman v. Alabama, 399 U.S. 1 (U.S. 1970)
- Harrison v. Louie L. Wainwright, 243 So. 2d 427 (Fla. 1st DCA 1971)
- Brown's Bldg. Supply, Inc. v. The Commonwealth Corp., 230 So. 2d 168 (Fla. 1st DCA 1970)
- Wright v. State, 182 So. 2d 273 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966)
- Prather v. State, 182 So. 2d 273 (Fla. 2d DCA 1966)
- Miller v. State, 246 So. 2d 169 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971)
- Sotomayor v. State, 224 So. 2d 357 (Fla. 2d DCA 1969)
- Elvina Moran v. Anderson, 224 So. 2d 357 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969)