McMillan v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

McMillan v. State

135 So. 3d 386, 2014 WL 338503, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 1141, 39 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 256

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 31, 2014

DocketNo. 5D13-2186

StatusPublished

This text of 135 So. 3d 386 (McMillan 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

McMillan v. State, 135 So. 3d 386, 2014 WL 338503, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 1141, 39 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 256 (Fla. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED. See Hess v. State, 794 So.2d 1249, 1261 (Fla.2001) (“Because we find sufficient evidence of felony murder, we need not address appellant’s claim that the trial court erred in denying his motion for judgment of acquittal because the evidence was insufficient to establish premeditation.”); see also Brooks v. State, 762 So.2d 879, 896 (Fla.2000); Brown v. State, 644 So.2d 52, 53 (Fla.1994).

TORPY, C.J., GRIFFIN and EVANDER, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED. See Hess v. State, 794 So.2d 1249, 1261 (Fla.2001) (“Because we find sufficient evidence of felony murder, we need not address appellant’s claim that the trial court erred in denying his motion for judgment of acquittal because the evidence was insufficient to establish premeditation.”); see also Brooks v. State, 762 So.2d 879, 896 (Fla.2000); Brown v. State, 644 So.2d 52, 53 (Fla.1994).

TORPY, C.J., GRIFFIN and EVANDER, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

135 So. 3d 386, 2014 WL 338503, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 1141, 39 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 256, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcmillan-v-state-fladistctapp-2014.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack