Gardner v. State

263 So. 2d 604, 1972 Fla. App. LEXIS 6636
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided June 20, 1972·No. No. 69-763·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We have examined the briefs and record filed in this appeal. We conclude that the requirements of Ch. 932.38, F.S.1969, now Ch. 925.07, F.S.1970, F.S.A. and of Snell v. Mayo, Fla.1956, 84 So.2d 581, were complied with, in that actual timely notice was received by defendant’s grandmother-guardian. We therefore affirm.

Affirmed.

WALDEN, CROSS and OWEN, JJ., concur.

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

Gardner v. State, 263 So. 2d 604, 1972 Fla. App. LEXIS 6636 (Fla. Ct. App. 1972).

263 So. 2d 604 (Gardner v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Snell v. Mayo
84 So. 2d 581 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1956)