Martin v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Martin v. State

326 So. 2d 248

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 3, 1976

DocketNo. 75-1566

StatusPublished

This text of 326 So. 2d 248 (Martin 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

Martin v. State, 326 So. 2d 248 (Fla. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This court, proceeding in the manner outlined and recommended by the Supreme Court of the United States in Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493, having deferred ruling on a motion of the public defender to withdraw as, counsel for the indigent defendants-appellants, and having furnished appellants with a copy of the public defender’s memorandum brief, and having allowed the appellants a reasonable specified time within which to raise any points that they chose in support of this appeal, and the appellants having failed to respond thereto, on consideration thereof upon full examination of the proceedings we conclude that the appeal is wholly frivolous. Whereupon, the public defender’s said motion to withdraw is granted, and the order or judgment appealed is hereby affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

This court, proceeding in the manner outlined and recommended by the Supreme Court of the United States in Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493, having deferred ruling on a motion of the public defender to withdraw as, counsel for the indigent defendants-appellants, and having furnished appellants with a copy of the public defender’s memorandum brief, and having allowed the appellants a reasonable specified time within which to raise any points that they chose in support of this appeal, and the appellants having failed to respond thereto, on consideration thereof upon full examination of the proceedings we conclude that the appeal is wholly frivolous. Whereupon, the public defender’s said motion to withdraw is granted, and the order or judgment appealed is hereby affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

326 So. 2d 248, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/martin-v-state-fladistctapp-1976.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack