JAMES WILLIAM JOSEY, APPELLANT,
v.
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.
The court affirmed Josey's conviction for resisting arrest with violence, finding no reversible error, abuse of discretion, or misapplication of law by the trial court.
A conviction for resisting arrest with violence must be affirmed when the defendant received a fair trial with adequate constitutional protections and competent counsel representation.
Josey was charged with resisting arrest with violence and malicious injury to personal property; he was found guilty on the first count, the trial cou…
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 Resisting Arrest With Violence cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant, James William Josey, was charged in a two-count information by the state attorney of Hillsborough County. In count one the offense alleged therein was resisting arrest with violence. In count two the offense alleged therein was malicious injury to personal property. Appel-, lant entered a plea of not guilty, was tried by jury, found guilty of count one, and the court declared a mistrial as to count two. Appellant’s motion for new trial was denied by the trial court. Appellant was adjudged guilty and sentenced to five years in the state prison. This appeal was timely filed. We have carefully reviewed the. record and closely examined the three points raised by appellant on appeal. The record, as the trial court stated in denying appellant’s counsel’s request for presentence investigation, “. . . speakfs] loud and clear.”
Appellant was entitled to a fair trial — he received one. His constitutional rights as set forth in the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Florida were amply protected and safeguarded. He was represented ably by his counsel at trial.
Appellant having failed to demonstrate reversible error, abuse of discretion or misapplication of the law by the trial court, the judgment and sentence are hereby
Affirmed.
McNULTY and BOARDMAN, JJ., concur. MANN, C. J., concurs in judgment.