Britt v. State

131 So. 136, 100 Fla. 1387
Supreme Court of Florida·Decided December 2, 1930·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

In this cause Mr. Chief Justice Terrell, Mr. Justice Brown and Mr. Justice Buford are of the opinion that the judgment of the court below should be reversed, while Mr. Justice Whitfield, Mr. Justice Ellis and Mr. Justice Strum are of opinion that said judgment *1388 should be affirmed. When it appears that the members of the Court are permanently and equally divided in opinion as to whether a judgment should be affirmed or reversed, and there is no prospect of an immediate change in the personnel of the Court, the judgment should be affirmed; therefore, it is considered, ordered and adjudged under the authority of State ex rel. Hampton v. McClung, 47 Fla. 224, 37 So. R. 51, that the judgment of the circuit court in this cause be and the same is hereby affirmed.

Terrell, C. J., and Wi-iiteield, Ellis, Strum, Brown and Buford, J. J., concur.

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

Britt v. State, 131 So. 136, 100 Fla. 1387 (Fla. 1930).

131 So. 136 (Britt v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

First Trust & Savings Bank v. West Lake Investment Co.
141 So. 894 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1932)