Frazier v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Frazier v. State

362 So. 2d 1048, 1978 Fla. App. LEXIS 16674

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 5, 1978

DocketNo. KK-24

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 362 So. 2d 1048 (Frazier 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

Frazier v. State, 362 So. 2d 1048, 1978 Fla. App. LEXIS 16674 (Fla. Ct. App. 1978).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant challenged the eyewitness identification at his trial by way of a motion to vacate, set aside or correct sentence. (Rule 3.850, Fla.R.Crim.P.) The trial court denied the motion without an evidentiary hearing and we affirm.

The testimony concerning the pre-trial line-ups and the identification at trial was properly presented to the jury for resolution. Furthermore, the issue of the sufficiency of the eyewitness identification could have been raised on direct appeal. Von Eberstein v. State, 270 So.2d 444 (Fla. 1st D.C.A. 1972).

We, therefore, AFFIRM.

McCORD, C. J., and BOYER and MILLS, JJ., concur.

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