WILLIAM CROSS, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 1st DCA | 1975-08-12
No. Y-3
BOYER, C. J., and RAWLS and Mc-CORD, JJ., concur.
319 So. 2d 167 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (1975) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

We have carefully examined the record-on-appeal and the briefs filed by able counsel. The evidence is not conflicting. 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. 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 and sentence appealed are

Affirmed.

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


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Smith v. State, 7 So. 3d 473 (Fla. 2009)
    …tate witnesses claimed to recognize a courtroom spectator as a “known killer” and feared for his safety. Requiring spectators to identify themselves when a witness fears for his life is within the discretion of the trial judge. See Resnick v. State, 319 So. 2d 167, 169 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975) (“[Wjhen a judge is so advised of pending potential violence, he has the inherent authority and the duty to invoke such security as under existing circumstances appears to be reasonably necessary for the protection, not only…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw