RONALD LEE SCOTT, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
RONALD LEE SCOTT, APPELLANT,
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
253 So. 2d 454
Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (1971)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 6 cases
Opinion of the Court
We have carefully examined the briefs and record-on-appeal in this case, oral argument having been waived. We find no reversible error.
In particular, we do not find the out-of-court photographic identification of defendant by the victim to be violative of the due process standards set forth in Simmons v. United States, 1968, 390 U.S. 377, 88 S.Ct. 967, 19 L.Ed.2d 1247. See also Jenkins v. State, Fla.App.1969, 228 So.2d 114.
The decision appealed from is, therefore, affirmed.
Affirmed.
WALDEN, CROSS and OWEN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Schuty v. State, 281 So. 2d 507 (Fla. 1st DCA 1973)…1 (i) (2), Cr.P.R. . All Florida Surety Company v. State (Fla.1955), 78 So. 2d 89. . Ex parte Livingston (1934), 116 Fla. 640, 156 So. 612. . State ex rel. Young v. Willis (Fla.App.1972), 257 So. 2d 64; State ex rel. Novak v. Sepe (Fla.App.1971), 253 So. 2d 454; State ex rel. Hanks v. Goodman (Fla.1971), 253 So. 2d 129; State ex rel. Dennis v. Morphonios (Fla.App.1971), 252 So. 2d 845.…
-
State v. Hill, 299 So. 2d 625 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974)…x rel. Hanks and Seymour v. Goodman, Fla., 253 So. 2d 129, opin. filed October 6, 1971.” (at page 862) Our sister court of the Third District, following State ex rel. Hanks v. Goodman, supra, said in State ex rel. Novak v. Sepe, Fla.App. (3d) 1971, 253 So. 2d 454: “Inasmuch as the demand for speedy trial was filed (after arrest) prior to the filing of the information, it is clear that the demand for speedy trial was premature and ineffective. * * *” (at page 455) In State v. Gravlee, Sup.Ct.Fla. 1973, 276…
-
Rembert v. State, 284 So. 2d 428 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973)…This clearly was error. The Supreme Court has held that a demand for speedy trial which is filed prior to the information is a nullity. State ex rel. Hanks v. Goodman (Fla.1971), 253 So. 2d 129; see also, State ex rel. Novak v. Sepe (Fla.App.1971), 253 So. 2d 454; State ex rel. Dennis v. Morphonios (Fla.App.1971), 252 So. 2d 845. The state maintains that no showing of prejudice was made in fact before the trial judge because the state informed the court that defense counsel was present at a preliminary hear…
Authorities Cited
- Simmons v. United States, 390 U.S. 377 (U.S. 1968)
- Grady Eugene Jenkins v. State, 228 So. 2d 114 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969)