Doherty v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Doherty v. State

640 So. 2d 1220, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 7759, 1994 WL 406616

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 5, 1994

DocketNo. 93-2924

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 640 So. 2d 1220 (Doherty 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

Doherty v. State, 640 So. 2d 1220, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 7759, 1994 WL 406616 (Fla. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

HARRIS, Chief Judge.

The appellant, Edward Doherty, was convicted of carrying a concealed firearm pursuant to section 790.01, Florida Statutes (1993). He appeals the denial of his motion to suppress the firearm found in his vehicle after he consented to the search. Because the legal basis for his argument on appeal is entirely different from the argument he propounded to the trial court, the error was not preserved for review. See Tillman v. State, 471 So.2d 32 (Fla.1985) (in order to adequately preserve an alleged error for appellate review, the legal basis for the argument at the trial court level must be generally the same as the legal basis for the claim of error at the appellate level).

AFFIRMED.

PETERSON and DIAMANTIS, JJ., concur.

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

HARRIS, Chief Judge.

The appellant, Edward Doherty, was convicted of carrying a concealed firearm pursuant to section 790.01, Florida Statutes (1993). He appeals the denial of his motion to suppress the firearm found in his vehicle after he consented to the search. Because the legal basis for his argument on appeal is entirely different from the argument he propounded to the trial court, the error was not preserved for review. See Tillman v. State, 471 So.2d 32 (Fla.1985) (in order to adequately preserve an alleged error for appellate review, the legal basis for the argument at the trial court level must be generally the same as the legal basis for the claim of error at the appellate level).

AFFIRMED.

PETERSON and DIAMANTIS, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

640 So. 2d 1220, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 7759, 1994 WL 406616, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/doherty-v-state-fladistctapp-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack