HOWARD LELAND THOMAS, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 1974-06-25
No. 73-1250
Per Curiam
296 So. 2d 503 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1974) Positive Treatment
Cited by 4 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.

Synopsis

Florida appellate court affirmed conviction for breaking and entering a dwelling with intent to commit grand larceny while armed and assault with intent to commit murder, finding sufficient evidence and no reversible trial court error.


Holding

The conviction for breaking and entering a dwelling with intent to commit grand larceny while armed with a deadly weapon and assault with intent to commit murder is affirmed because the evidence is sufficient and no reversible trial court error occurred.


Facts & Procedural History

Appellant was convicted by jury of breaking and entering a dwelling with intent to commit grand larceny while armed with a deadly weapon and assault w…

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 seeks review of a judgment of conviction based upon a jury -verdict finding him guilty under count one of breaking and entering a dwelling with intent to commit grand larceny while armed with a deadly weapon and on a second count of assault with intent to commit murder. A sentence of life imprisonment was imposed on the breaking and entering count and a fifteen year sentence on the assault with intent to commit murder count, the sentences to run concurrently.

Appellant urges reversal on the grounds that the evidence was insufficient to convict him of breaking and entering a dwelling with intent to commit grand larceny; that the trial court erred in failing to cure an alleged prejudicial statement elicited from a witness by the prosecuting attorney and that the court erred in admitting testimony of a state rebuttal witness whose name had not been previously disclosed. The grounds relied on by the appellant for reversal have been carefully considered in the light of the record, briefs and argument of counsel and we find no reversible error has been shown. The record discloses that the case was fully and fairly tried, that the verdict is supported by the evidence and that the several rulings of the trial judge challenged by appellant did not on the record and under the law, constitute reversible error. Therefore the judgment appealed is affirmed.

Affirmed.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Thomas v. State, 305 So. 2d 204 (Fla. 1974)
    …Certiorari denied. 296 So. 2d 503. ADKINS, C. J., and ROBERTS, ERVIN, McCAIN and OVERTON, JJ„ concur.…
  • Lane v. State, 353 So. 2d 937 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978)
    …PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See, e. g., Spinkellink v. State, 313 So. 2d 666 (Fla.1975); Thomas v. State, 296 So. 2d 503 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974); Laytner v. State, 239 So. 2d 857 (Fla. 3d DCA 1970); Carroll v. State, 186 So. 2d 834 (Fla. 4th DCA 1966); Wright v. State, 182 So. 2d 264 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966); and Savage v. State, 156 So. 2d 566 (Fla. 1st DCA 1963).…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw