Lee v. State

492 So. 2d 470, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 1757, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 11522
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Lee v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1533
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided August 11, 1986·No. No. BK-168·Published

Opinions

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a conviction and sentence for burglary of a conveyance and theft of a firearm. Appellant’s attorney has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), representing to the Court that, in his professional judgment, no reversible error appears and that he cannot in good conscience present an argument in support of the defendant’s appeal. Accordingly, appellant was permitted to file a pro se brief in which he asserts that the evidence was insufficient to support the verdict. We disagree and find the evidence sufficient. From our review of the record, we can discern no other arguable issue.

AFFIRMED.

WIGGINTON, and NIMMONS, JJ., concur. MILLS, J., dissents with written opinion.

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

Lee v. State, 492 So. 2d 470, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 1757, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 11522 (Fla. Ct. App. 1986).

492 So. 2d 470 (Lee v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)
Horton v. State
442 So. 2d 1064 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1983)
State v. Dunmann
427 So. 2d 166 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1983)
Cox v. State
394 So. 2d 237 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1981)