Brown v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Brown v. State

136 So. 2d 15

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 4, 1962

DocketNo. 61-329

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 136 So. 2d 15 (Brown 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

Brown v. State, 136 So. 2d 15 (Fla. Ct. App. 1962).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The Appellant, Ceaser Brown, was informed against and tried in the Criminal Court of Record in Dade County without a jury. He was convicted of manslaughter under § 782.07, Fla.Stat., F.S.A., and sentenced to be confined for a period of three years. The question presented on appeal is whether the evidence was sufficient to sustain the conviction. Appellant was charged with having caused the death of one Olive Kodner through culpable negligence in the operation of a motor vehicle. Having heard oral argument, considered the briefs and examined the record on appeal, we conclude the trial judge was eminently correct in his denials of the defendant’s motions for directed verdict and for new trial, and that the evidence produced was sufficient to meet the requirements of proof and establish the guilt of the accused. See Penton v. State, Fla.App.1959, 114 So.2d 381; Fulton v. State, Fla.1959, 108 So.2d 473.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

The Appellant, Ceaser Brown, was informed against and tried in the Criminal Court of Record in Dade County without a jury. He was convicted of manslaughter under § 782.07, Fla.Stat., F.S.A., and sentenced to be confined for a period of three years. The question presented on appeal is whether the evidence was sufficient to sustain the conviction. Appellant was charged with having caused the death of one Olive Kodner through culpable negligence in the operation of a motor vehicle. Having heard oral argument, considered the briefs and examined the record on appeal, we conclude the trial judge was eminently correct in his denials of the defendant’s motions for directed verdict and for new trial, and that the evidence produced was sufficient to meet the requirements of proof and establish the guilt of the accused. See Penton v. State, Fla.App.1959, 114 So.2d 381; Fulton v. State, Fla.1959, 108 So.2d 473.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

136 So. 2d 15, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brown-v-state-fladistctapp-1962.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack