Edwards v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Edwards v. State

543 So. 2d 290, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 1032, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 2194, 1989 WL 39543

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Edwards v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 530 So. 2d 936 →

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided April 26, 1989·No. No. 4-86-2182·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED. We believe the evidence was sufficient to sustain appellant’s conviction. In addition, on the evidence presented, we believe a reasonable jury could have found that appellant’s alleged theory of the case did not present a reasonable hypothesis of innocence. See Berriel v. State, 524 So.2d 1147 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988). We also find no reversible error in the other issues raised on appeal,

ANSTEAD, LETTS and GARRETT, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED. We believe the evidence was sufficient to sustain appellant’s conviction. In addition, on the evidence presented, we believe a reasonable jury could have found that appellant’s alleged theory of the case did not present a reasonable hypothesis of innocence. See Berriel v. State, 524 So.2d 1147 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988). We also find no reversible error in the other issues raised on appeal,

ANSTEAD, LETTS and GARRETT, JJ., concur.

Edwards v. State, 543 So. 2d 290, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 1032, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 2194, 1989 WL 39543 (Fla. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

543 So. 2d 290 (Edwards v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related