Ortiz v. State
This text of 689 So. 2d 353 (Ortiz 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
Manfredo ORTIZ, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, and Allyn Giambalvo, Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Ron Napolitano, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.
PER CURIAM.
We affirm the appellant's judgment and sentence. Because this court lacks the authority to review the trial court's order denying the appellant's motion for case reassignment, we are precluded from reaching the substantive issues raised. Wild v. Dozier, 672 So.2d 16, 18 (Fla.1996).
Affirmed.
PATTERSON, A.C.J., and ALTENBERND and LAZZARA, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
689 So. 2d 353, 1997 WL 61026, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ortiz-v-state-fladistctapp-1997.