Parker v. State

216 So. 2d 476
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided December 13, 1968·No. No. 68-217·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

MANN, Judge.

Appellant claims that because one witness identified another man as the third participant in this armed robbery the evidence is insufficient to support his conviction. But another witness testified that he was one of the robbers, and the jury resolved the conflict in testimony against Parker.

Oral argument is dispensed with pursuant to F.A.R. 3.10, subd. e, 32 F.S.A. as serving no useful purpose.

Affirmed.

ALLEN, Acting C. J., and HOBSON, J., concur.

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

Parker v. State, 216 So. 2d 476 (Fla. Ct. App. 1968).

216 So. 2d 476 (Parker v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Braxton v. State
226 So. 2d 692 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1969)