ED THOMAS, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 2d DCA | 1972-07-12
No. 71-895
PIERCE, C. J., and LILES and MANN, JJ., concur.
264 So. 2d 77 Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (1972)

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 State's failure to notify appellant's attorney before fingerprinting him did not violate his constitutional rights.


Facts & Procedural History

Appellant was convicted of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. His attorney filed an Anders brief, but appellant argued the State failed to …

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.

Appellant was charged and convicted by jury with possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. He was sentenced to serve a term of fifteen years in the State prison. Following his conviction, appellant appeals.

Appellant was represented at the trial by counsel other than the Public Defender, but the case was transferred to the Public Defender’s Office for appeal and they filed an “Anders” type brief, suggesting that there was no arguable error committed in the trial. This court entered its order pursuant to Leone v. State, Fla.App.1970, 233 So.2d 404. Appellant filed, in pro. per., a statement of the case and argued in effect that since the State failed to take fingerprints from the firearm he was in possession of they had failed to prove their case.

*78We have reviewed the entire transcript and testimony adduced at the trial and find this contention to be without merit.

In reviewing the record, we find that the State had fingerprinted appellant while in custody prior to trial without notifying appellant’s attorney. This does not constitute a denial of appellant’s constitutional rights. See Gentille v. State, Fla.App.1966, 190 So.2d 200.

No error having been made to appear, we therefore affirm.

PIERCE, C. J., and LILES and MANN, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw