Opinion · Florida Court Opinions

GRISSOM v. STATE, 259 So.2d 738 (Fla.App. 3 Dist. 1972)

ERNEST LEE GRISSOM, APPELLANT, v. STATE OF Fla., APPELLEE., 259 So. 2d 738 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1972)

Type: Opinion
Court: Florida Court Opinions
Jurisdiction: Florida
Date: 1972-04-04
Topic: general

GRISSOM v. STATE, 259 So.2d 738 (Fla.App. 3 Dist. 1972) ERNEST LEE GRISSOM, APPELLANT, v. THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE. No. 71-760.District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District. April 4, 1972.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed GRISSOM v. STATE, 259 So.2d 738 (Fla.App. 3 Dist. 1972). The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

GRISSOM v. STATE,259 So.2d 738(Fla.App. 3 Dist. 1972)

ERNEST LEE GRISSOM, APPELLANT, v. THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE.

No. 71-760.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

April 4, 1972.

Appeal from the Criminal Court of Record, Dade County; Jack M. Turner, Judge.

Phillip A. Hubbart, Public Defender, and Bennett H. Brummer, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Joel D. Rosenblatt, Asst. Atty. Gen. and Edward D. Gewirtz, Legal Intern, for appellee.

Before BARKDULL, C.J., and PEARSON and HENDRY, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. Swindle v. State, Fla.App. 1967,202 So.2d 132; Suarez v. State, Fla. App. 1969,220 So.2d 442; Grissom v. State, Fla.App. 1970,237 So.2d 57; Peterson v. State, Fla.App. 1970,237 So.2d 23; Lopetegui v. State, Fla.App. 1972,257 So.2d 914(opinion filed January 25, 1972).Page 739