Bonds v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Bonds v. State

318 So. 2d 521, 1975 Fla. App. LEXIS 15222

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedSeptember 16, 1975

DocketNo. 74-1207

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 318 So. 2d 521 (Bonds 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

Bonds v. State, 318 So. 2d 521, 1975 Fla. App. LEXIS 15222 (Fla. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

From an order revoking probation, this appeal was taken. While on probation, appellant was arrested on a charge of assault with intent to commit robbery. In the proceedings upon this charge, appellant successfully moved to suppress the victim’s identification of him to a police officer. He thereupon moved for a jury trial as to the issue of identification in his probation violation hearing. The motion was denied and probation revoked upon the clear identification of the appellant as the person who committed the assault.

Appellant argues that the trial court abused its discretion by failing to impanel a jury for an advisory opinion on the issue of his identity as the perpetrator of the crime for the purpose of determining whether his parole was, in fact, violated. We find no abuse of discretion. See Singletary v. State, Fla.App.1974, 290 So.2d 116 and Heath v. State, Fla.App.1975, 310 So.2d 38.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

From an order revoking probation, this appeal was taken. While on probation, appellant was arrested on a charge of assault with intent to commit robbery. In the proceedings upon this charge, appellant successfully moved to suppress the victim’s identification of him to a police officer. He thereupon moved for a jury trial as to the issue of identification in his probation violation hearing. The motion was denied and probation revoked upon the clear identification of the appellant as the person who committed the assault.

Appellant argues that the trial court abused its discretion by failing to impanel a jury for an advisory opinion on the issue of his identity as the perpetrator of the crime for the purpose of determining whether his parole was, in fact, violated. We find no abuse of discretion. See Singletary v. State, Fla.App.1974, 290 So.2d 116 and Heath v. State, Fla.App.1975, 310 So.2d 38.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

318 So. 2d 521, 1975 Fla. App. LEXIS 15222, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bonds-v-state-fladistctapp-1975.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack