Knight v. State
114 So. 3d 351, 2013 WL 1978513, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 7819
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided May 15, 2013·No. No. 3D12-2185·Published·Cited by 1 cases
Opinion
Affirmed. See O’Neal v. State, 54 Fla. 96, 98, 44 So. 940 (Fla.1907) (noting that “mere inaccuracies of expression” will not render verdict void where manifest intent is clear when viewing record as a whole). See also Ashley v. State, 850 So.2d 1265, 1268 n. 8 (Fla.2003) (defining scrivener’s error as clerical error distinct from erroneous judicial determination).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Knight v. State, 114 So. 3d 351, 2013 WL 1978513, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 7819 (Fla. Ct. App. 2013).
114 So. 3d 351 (Knight v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Knight v. State
159 So. 3d 943 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2015)