JOHN HAMILTON HOOVER, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 1971-09-07
Nos. 70-1047, 70-1153, 70-1189
Before SWANN, C. J., and CHARLES CARROLL and BARKDULL, JJ.
252 So. 2d 872 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1971) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

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.


Holding

The court held that the trial judge did not abuse discretion in denying the defendant's motion for mistrial and request for a curative instruction.


Facts & Procedural History

John Hamilton Hoover was convicted of arson in the third degree. His probation for a prior crime was revoked, and he was sentenced for both offenses. …

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

John Hamilton Hoover was found guilty of a crime and placed on probation for a term of seven years. See Hoover v. State, Fla.App.1968, 212 So.2d 95.

Subsequently, he was charged with arson in the third degree and after a jury trial he was convicted and adjudicated. His sentence of probation for the prior crime was revoked; he was sentenced to three years for that crime and placed on probation for a period of five years for the arson conviction which is to be served upon completion of the three year sentence. His appeals from the conviction and adjudication of arson in the third degree and revocation of probation have been consolidated.

The argument advanced for reversal is that the trial judge erred in denying the defendant’s motion for mistrial and request for a curative instruction to the jury.

We have carefully reviewed the testimony, objections, statements of counsel and actions of the trial judge. A trial judge has wide discretion in declaring a mistrial. First Nat. Bank in Tarpon Springs v. Bliss, Fla.1952, 56 So.2d 922.

We hold that the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in refusing to grant the defendant’s motion for mistrial and for a curative instruction to the jury. Cf. Wade v. State, Fla.App.1967, 204 So.2d 235.

The conviction and adjudication for arson in the third degree are affirmed.

Having affirmed the arson conviction and adjudication it follows that the order revoking probation on the prior conviction was proper. See State ex rel. Sawyer v. Cochran, Fla.1962, 140 So.2d 597.

The final orders and judgments herein appealed are, therefore,

Affirmed.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Watson v. State, 270 So. 2d 407 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972)
    …as a result of this incident, but this motion was denied. It has long been recognized in Florida jurisprudence that the granting or denial of a motion for mistrial is a matter within the discretion of the trial judge. Hoover v. State, Fla.App.197l, 252 So. 2d 872; Reis v. State, Fla.App.1971, 248 So. 2d 666; McCoy v. State, Fla.App.1965, 175 So. 2d 588; Garcia v. State, Fla.App.1962, 142 So. 2d 318. On review of the record on appeal we find that the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in denying the def…
  • Howell v. State, 271 So. 2d 811 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973)
    …Fla.App.1965, 172 So. 2d 628; State v. Outten, Fla. 1968, 206 So. 2d 392; Simpson v. State, Fla.App. 1968, 211 So. 2d 862; Matera v. State, Fla.App.1968, 218 So. 2d 180; Ramirez v. State, Fla.App.1970, 241 So. 2d 744; Hoover v. State, Fla.App.1971, 252 So. 2d 872; Cole v. State, Fla.App.1972, 262 So. 2d 902; § 924.33, Fla.Stat., F.S.A.…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw