Berning v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Berning v. State

639 So. 2d 151, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 6623, 1994 WL 288109

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJuly 1, 1994

DocketNo. 93-2352

StatusPublished

This text of 639 So. 2d 151 (Berning v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Berning v. State, 639 So. 2d 151, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 6623, 1994 WL 288109 (Fla. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

COBB, Judge.

The appellant, Berning, contends the facts adduced at his trial were insufficient to sustain his conviction of vehicular homicide. The evidence favorable to the state was that Berning, while driving in the rain on a hilly two-lane road at an excessive speed, attempted to pass another vehicle in a no-passing zone, resulting in a head-on collision with an oncoming vehicle and the death of the other driver. In our opinion, these facts were sufficient. See Byrd v. State, 531 So.2d 1004 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988). We find no merit in the appellant’s argument in respect to the denial of his motion to dismiss per Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.190(c)(4). See e.g., State v. Patel, 453 So.2d 218 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984).

AFFIRMED.'

HARRIS, C.J., and DAUKSCH, J., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

COBB, Judge.

The appellant, Berning, contends the facts adduced at his trial were insufficient to sustain his conviction of vehicular homicide. The evidence favorable to the state was that Berning, while driving in the rain on a hilly two-lane road at an excessive speed, attempted to pass another vehicle in a no-passing zone, resulting in a head-on collision with an oncoming vehicle and the death of the other driver. In our opinion, these facts were sufficient. See Byrd v. State, 531 So.2d 1004 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988). We find no merit in the appellant’s argument in respect to the denial of his motion to dismiss per Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.190(c)(4). See e.g., State v. Patel, 453 So.2d 218 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984).

AFFIRMED.'

HARRIS, C.J., and DAUKSCH, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

639 So. 2d 151, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 6623, 1994 WL 288109, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/berning-v-state-fladistctapp-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack