DANIEL EUGENE GRAY, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Sound Judicial Discretion cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The appellant has presented two points on appeal from his conviction for murder in the first degree. The first point does not present error because it is our view that the curative instruction given after the prosecutor’s comment substantially eradicated any possible prejudice. See Hanson v. State, Fla.1952, 56 So. 2d 129.
Appellant’s second point urges that he should have been given a psychological examination pursuant to CrPR 3.740 prior to sentencing. The rule clearly places the matter within the sound judicial discretion of the trial judge who has heard the evidence. In this case, no evidence was offered to the trial judge to suggest that the appellant was insane at the time he came in for sentencing. We think that the clear intent of the rule is that in the absence of evidence indicating insanity at the time of the sentencing, the trial judge need not order such an examination. See Grissom v. Wainwright, 494 F. 2d 30 (5th Cir. 1974).
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Duke v. State, 444 So. 2d 492 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984)…In the absence of evidence indicating insanity at the time of sentencing, the trial judge is not required to order such an examination. Cabe v. State, 408 So. 2d 694 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982), cert. denied, 435 [*495] So. 2d 821 (Fla.1983); Gray v. State, 310 So. 2d 320 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975). Having found no abuse of discretion, we conclude the trial court properly denied appellant’s request for further psychiatric examination. Finally, appellant contends, and correctly, that the trial court erred in imposing costs i…
-
Cabe v. State, 408 So. 2d 694 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)…ant’s position that there was any evidence of insanity. On this record, we conclude that the court’s refusal to direct such an evaluation was not error because no evidence was offered to suggest insanity at the time of sentencing. See Gray v. State, 310 So. 2d 320, 321 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975). Appellant’s final point requires reversal of the conviction and a remand of the case for new trial. He asserts that it was reversible error for the court to refuse his requested instruction that attempted false imprisonment…
-
Coney v. State, 348 So. 2d 672 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977)
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Hanson v. State, 56 So. 2d 129 (Fla. 1952)
- Grissom v. Louie L. Wainwright, 494 F.2d 30 (5th Cir. 1974)