GURNEY A. CRIBB, JR., APPELLANT,
v.
RALPH J. ELLISON, INDIVIDUALLY, AND PORT CARRIERS, INC., A CORPORATION, APPELLEES
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Deference To Trier Of Fact cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We have carefully examined the record' on appeal and the briefs filed by able counsel. Although the evidence giving rise to the entry of the final judgment based upon a jury verdict which is here appealed was in conflict, those conflicts were resolved by the trier of the fact for whose judgment we may not substitute ours. We find no error of law as applied to those facts. Further, the briefs of the parties reveal that each point here presented has been heretofore determined by decisions of this Court and of the Supreme Court of Florida. (See Thompson v. Jacobs, et al., Fla.App. 1st 1975, 314 So. 2d 797, 1975; Kerr v. Caraway, Sup.Ct.Fla.1955, 78 So. 2d 571; Myers v. Korbly, Fla.App. 2nd 1958, 103 So. 2d 215 and Central Hardware Co. v. Stampler, Fla.App. 3rd 1965, 180 So. 2d 205) Nothing would be added to the jurisprudence of this State by again discussing those points here.
Appellant having failed to demonstrate prejudicial error, the judgment appealed is
Affirmed.
JOHNSON, Acting C. J., and BOYER and McCORD, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (19 total)
-
State v. Naveira, 873 So. 2d 300 (Fla. 2004)…not prepared to go to trial in ten days. The State correctly did not oppose a continuance, and the trial court correctly granted it. In fact, denial of such a request may constitute an abuse of discretion in these circumstances. See Sumbry v. State, 310 So. 2d 445, 447 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975) (finding no problem with the State’s filing the information 171 days after arrest, but holding that the defendant’s motion for continuance should have been granted, and remanding for a new trial); Washington v. State, 378 So.…
-
Brown v. State, 426 So. 2d 76 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983)…6, 73 L.Ed.2d 1322 (1982). A number of cases detail circumstances rising toi the level of a palpable abuse of discretion. Harley v. State, 407 So. 2d 382 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981); Lightsey v. State, 364 So. 2d 72 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978); and Sumbry v. State, 310 So. 2d 445 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975). The common thread running through each of these cases is that defense counsel must be afforded an adequate opportunity to investigate and prepare any applicable defenses. This right is inherent in the right to counsel. Harley, at…
-
State v. Fraser, 426 So. 2d 46 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982)…rt denied the motion to dismiss, but extended the trial date to a time more than 180 days from the date of the original arrest, and later granted the motion for discharge from which this appeal follows. Appellee relies on dictum in Sumbry v. State, 310 So. 2d 445 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975), as authority for the proposition that a trial judge has the right, when he thinks that the spirit of the speedy trial rule has been violated (if not the letter) to set the trial date beyond 180 days and thereafter discharge a def…
Previewing 3 of 19 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Myers v. Korbly, 103 So. 2d 215 (Fla. 2d DCA 1958)
- Kerr v. Caraway, 78 So. 2d 571 (Fla. 1955)
- Thompson v. Jacobs, 314 So. 2d 797 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975)
- Cent. Hardware Co. v. Sydelle Stampler, 180 So. 2d 205 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965)