HARVEY BRUCE ROBERTS, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 1st DCA | 1974-04-09
No. U-195
RAWLS, C. J., and BOYER and Mc-CORD, JJ., concur.
292 So. 2d 371 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (1974) Positive Treatment
Cited by 1 case

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

The same factual situation which is involved in the case sub judice has been repeatedly considered by this court. See Roberts v. Wainwright, Fla.App. 1st 1971, 251 So. 2d 157; Roberts v. State, Fla.App. 1st 1972, 265 So. 2d 431; Roberts v. State, Fla.App. 1st 1972, 266 So. 2d 421; and Roberts v. State, Fla.App. 1st 1973, 281 So. 2d 219.

We have carefully examined the record on appeal and the briefs submitted by both the appellant and the appellee and find that the appellant has failed to demonstrate reversible error. Therefore, the order appealed from be and it is hereby affirmed.

RAWLS, C. J., and BOYER and Mc-CORD, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Roberts v. State, 521 So. 2d 289 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988)
    …So. 2d 219 (Fla. 1st DCA 1973). He filed a second Rule 3.850 motion, raising the issues of illegal consecutive sentences and ineffective assistance of counsel. The trial court denied that motion, and this court per curiam affirmed. Roberts v. State, 292 So. 2d 371 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974). Appellant filed a third Rule 3.850 motion, raising a double jeopardy issue. The trial court denied the motion. Appellant filed a fourth Rule 3.850 motion, raising again the issue of illegal consecutive sentences and error in the…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw