Lynch v. State

314 So. 2d 173, 1975 Fla. App. LEXIS 13692
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided June 13, 1975·No. No. 74-1213·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was convicted of robbery. Of the five points raised on appeal, only the first four are properly before us and we conclude that none of them demonstrate reversible error. The fifth point attacks the constitutionality of Section 39.02(5) (c), F.S. (1973). The issue of the constitutionality of this statute was not raised and directly passed upon by the trial court and as such is precluded from consideration by this court. State v. McInnes, 133 So.2d 581 (1st D.C.A.Fla.1961); see also, Bissonette v. State, 307 So.2d 222 (4th D.C.A.Fla.1975); Franklin v. State, 285 So.2d 32 (4th D.C.A.Fla.1973); Mann v. State, 209 So.2d 472 (1st D.C.A.Fla.1968); but see, Papp v. State, 281 So.2d 600 (4th D.C.A.Fla.1973).

Affirmed.

OWEN, C. J., and MAGER and DOW-NEY, JJ., concur.

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

Lynch v. State, 314 So. 2d 173, 1975 Fla. App. LEXIS 13692 (Fla. Ct. App. 1975).

314 So. 2d 173 (Lynch v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Papp v. State
281 So. 2d 600 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1973)
State v. McInnes
133 So. 2d 581 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1961)
Mann v. State
209 So. 2d 472 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1968)
Franklin v. State
285 So. 2d 32 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1973)
Bissonette v. State
307 So. 2d 222 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1975)