STEVE AMECK, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
STEVE AMECK, APPELLANT,
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
248 So. 2d 534
Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1971)
Caution
Cited by 8 cases
Opinion of the Court
On this appeal by the' defendant below from conviction of possession and sale of marijuana, upon which he was sentenced to 90 days in jail and placed on probation for two years, the appellant seeks reversal on the contentions that the trial court unduly and improperly restricted cross-examination of a witness and that the evidence as to identity was insufficient. We have considered appellant’s contentions in the light of the record and briefs, and conclude that no reversible error has been shown.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Moneyhun v. Vital Indus., Inc., 611 So. 2d 1316 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993)…actions against corporations. See Tharp v. Kitchell, 151 Fla. 226, 233-34, 9 So. 2d 457, 460 (1942); Shell’s City, Inc. v. Westerman, 257 So. 2d 276, 279 n. 3 (Fla. 3d DCA1971), quashed on other grounds, 265 So. 2d 43 (Fla.1972); Olshen v. Robinson, 248 So. 2d 534, 535 (Fla. 3d DCA1971); 97 C.J.S. Witnesses § 212(b) (1957). Even if the dead man’s statute did apply to this case, the appellees waived its protection by relying on certain evidence offered in their memorandum of law in support of their motion for…
-
Shell's City, Inc. v. Westerman, 257 So. 2d 276 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971)…to be in violation of the dead man’s statute [§ 90.05, Fla.Stat., F.S.A.], a review of applicable authorities reveals it comes within an exception thereto. See: Tharp v. Kitchell, 151 Fla. 226, 9 So. 2d 457; compare Olshen v. Robinson, Fla.App.1971, 248 So. 2d 534.…
-
Viscito v. Fred S. Carbon Co., Inc., 636 So. 2d 194 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994)…since the action was only against the corporate entity and not against the estate of Fred Carbon, there is no basis to extend the Dead Person Statute to this action against a corporation. Thus, we reverse on this basis. See also Olshen v. Robinson, 248 So. 2d 534 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1971) (recognizing that testimony of transactions with deceased personally can be excluded, but not with deceased as an officer of a corporation). We also find reversible error as to appellants’ second point. We find that the trial co…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence