Morgan v. State
This text of 576 So. 2d 792 (Morgan 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.
Opinion
Joseph R. MORGAN, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender, and Anthony Calvello, Asst. Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Joseph A. Tringali, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.
PER CURIAM.
AFFIRMED. We find no error in the trial court's decision to permit, in essence, appellant to act as co-counsel. Cf. State v. Tait, 387 So.2d 338 (Fla. 1980). We also find no error in the trial court's denial of a mistrial and in admitting into evidence appellant's statement to the police. See Dufour v. State, 495 So.2d 154 (Fla. 1986) and State v. DiGuilio, 491 So.2d 1129 (Fla. 1986). Similarly, we reject appellant's claims as to the habitual offender statute. Johnson v. State, 564 So.2d 1174 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990). Finally, we find no double jeopardy violation by appellant's conviction of attempted burglary, possession of burglary tools and criminal mischief. See Ferguson v. State, 420 So.2d 585 (Fla. 1982).
ANSTEAD, LETTS and STONE, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
576 So. 2d 792, 1991 WL 27513, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/morgan-v-state-fladistctapp-1991.