Cikora v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Cikora v. State

450 So. 2d 351, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 13241

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 30, 1984

DocketNos. 83-1341, 83-1357

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 450 So. 2d 351 (Cikora 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

Cikora v. State, 450 So. 2d 351, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 13241 (Fla. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm appellant’s conviction because no reversible error was made to appear. As to the order revoking probation, four violations were claimed. We record that the first alleged violation, attempted burglary of the home of Florence Jarboe, was unsupported by record evidence and, thus, was not proven. However, the three remaining alleged violations were proven and furnish adequate support for the revocation.

Affirmed.

GLICKSTEIN, HURLEY and WALDEN, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We affirm appellant’s conviction because no reversible error was made to appear. As to the order revoking probation, four violations were claimed. We record that the first alleged violation, attempted burglary of the home of Florence Jarboe, was unsupported by record evidence and, thus, was not proven. However, the three remaining alleged violations were proven and furnish adequate support for the revocation.

Affirmed.

GLICKSTEIN, HURLEY and WALDEN, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

450 So. 2d 351, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 13241, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cikora-v-state-fladistctapp-1984.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack