EUGENE FULTON, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
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.
Appellant convicted of robbery and unlawful firearm possession was properly sentenced to concurrent terms; trial court did not err in permitting victim testimony without psychiatric examination or in refusing standard jury charges.
The trial court properly admitted victim testimony without psychiatric examination, refused to give standard jury charges where the charges given were sufficient, and properly imposed separate sentences for the two convictions to run concurrently.
[1] Trial court does not abuse discretion in refusing to require psychiatric examination of crime victim based on unsubstantiated reports of mental instability.
[2] Refusal to give standard jury charges is not reversible error where charges actually given are sufficient under applicable law.
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellant was charged by information with robbery, attempted murder, and unlawful possession of a firearm while engaged in a criminal offense. At jury…
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.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Multiple Convictions cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
By information, the appellant was charged in separate counts with robbery, attempted murder, and unlawful possession of a firearm while engaged in a criminal offense. On a jury trial, he was acquitted of the charge of the attempt to commit murder and was convicted on the other charges. Judgment was entered thereon. The court imposed a sentence of imprisonment for thirty years on the robbery conviction and for three years on the conviction for the third offense mentioned above, with provision for the sentences to be served concurrently. The defendant appealed.
On consideration of the record, briefs, and argument, we hold that no reversible error has been shown. In the circumstances presented, the trial court was not in error in permitting the victim to testify without the victim first being submitted to psychiatric examination. The court properly denied the defendant’s request that the victim be so examined, based on unsubstantiated reports relating to mental instability of the victim. The refusal of the trial court to give the standard jury charges was not reversible error in this case, where charges given by the court were sufficient under the law applicable to the case. Yost v. State, 243 So. 2d 469 (Fla.3rd DCA 1971); Dunlap v. State, 252 So. 2d 292 (Fla.2nd DCA 1971); White v. State, 324 So. 2d 115 (Fla.3rd DCA 1975).
The imposition of separate sentences for the two offenses of which the defendant was convicted was proper. Estevez v. State, 313 So. 2d 692 (Fla.1975); Swyers v. State, 334 So. 2d 278 (Fla.3rd DCA 1976); Johnson v. State, 338 So. 2d 556 (Fla.3rd DCA 1976).
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Honorable Harry Lee COE, III, 521 So. 2d 373 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988)…m’s competency to testify, where the trial court conducted a personal examination and was satisfied as to the victim’s competency. Hudson v. State, 368 So. 2d 437 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979), cert. denied, 381 So. 2d 767 (Fla.1980). See also Fulton v. State, 352 So. 2d 581 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977) (trial court properly denied defense request that victim of robbery and attempted murder be submitted to psychiatric examination where request was based on unsubstantiated reports of victim’s mental instability). In Hawkins v. St…
-
Simmons v. State, 683 So. 2d 1101 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996)…e a history of mental problems is also not enough to compel an evaluation. People v. Neely, 228 Cal.App.2d 16, 39 Cal.Rptr. 251 (1964) (affirming denial of psychological evaluation of victim who was inmate of state mental hospital); Fulton v. State, 352 So. 2d 581 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977) (psychological evaluation of allegedly mentally unstable witness unnecessary). Similarly, in State v. Coe, 521 So. 2d 373 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988), where the defendant alleged that the victim/witness suffered from alcoholism, that she…
-
Davis v. State, 373 So. 2d 382 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979)…ed from the Florida Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases. Finding that the instructions as utilized by the trial court, on the whole, were clear, comprehensive, and sufficient under the law applicable to the case, we affirm. Fulton v. State, 352 So. 2d 581 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1977), Yost v. State, 243 So. 2d 469 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1971), Darty v. State, 161 So. 2d 864 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1964). Notwithstanding our affirmance of appellant’s conviction, we feel compelled to comment upon the trial court’s wholesale devi…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Yost v. State, 243 So. 2d 469 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971)
- Ciro Estevez v. State, 313 So. 2d 692 (Fla. 1975)
- White v. State, 324 So. 2d 115 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975)
- Johnson v. State, 338 So. 2d 556 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976)
- Swyers v. State, 334 So. 2d 278 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976)
- Dunlap v. State, 252 So. 2d 292 (Fla. 2d DCA 1971)