Braxton v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Braxton v. State

226 So. 2d 692, 1969 Fla. App. LEXIS 5339

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided September 30, 1969·No. No. 69-99·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, defendant in the criminal court of record, seeks review of his conviction for armed robbery. The only issue preserved is the sufficiency of the evidence on identification of the culprit.

A review of the record reveals substantial, competent evidence which, if believed by the trier of fact, establishes beyond and to the exclusion of a reasonable doubt that the appellant was the culprit and, therefore, the judgment of conviction and sentence here under review should be affirmed upon the authority of Wright v. State, Fla.App.1966, 182 So.2d 264; Yant v. State, Fla.App.1966, 192 So.2d 297; Parker v. State, Fla.App.1968, 216 So.2d 476.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, defendant in the criminal court of record, seeks review of his conviction for armed robbery. The only issue preserved is the sufficiency of the evidence on identification of the culprit.

A review of the record reveals substantial, competent evidence which, if believed by the trier of fact, establishes beyond and to the exclusion of a reasonable doubt that the appellant was the culprit and, therefore, the judgment of conviction and sentence here under review should be affirmed upon the authority of Wright v. State, Fla.App.1966, 182 So.2d 264; Yant v. State, Fla.App.1966, 192 So.2d 297; Parker v. State, Fla.App.1968, 216 So.2d 476.

Affirmed.

Braxton v. State, 226 So. 2d 692, 1969 Fla. App. LEXIS 5339 (Fla. Ct. App. 1969).

Pincite

226 So. 2d 692 (Braxton v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related