Parrish v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Parrish v. State

151 So. 2d 68, 1963 Fla. App. LEXIS 3504

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 19, 1963

DocketNo. E-109

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 151 So. 2d 68 (Parrish 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

Parrish v. State, 151 So. 2d 68, 1963 Fla. App. LEXIS 3504 (Fla. Ct. App. 1963).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was charged in an information filed in the Circuit Court of Okaloosa County with the offense of issuing a worthless check. After a trial by jury in which he was represented by counsel, appellant was convicted and sentenced to serve a term of imprisonment in the State prison. It is from the judgment and sentence that this appeal is taken.

Appellant’s principal point on appeal alleges a denial of due process occasioned by the trial court’s refusal to cause subpoenas to be issued to witnesses whose testimony was deemed necessary to establish appellant’s innocence. The record fails to support this contention. It nowhere appears that the issuance of witness subpoenas was requested by appellant either before or during the trial. Nor does the record.reveal any objection by appellant to being placed on trial without the presence of witnesses whose testimony was considered necessary to his defense.

We have carefully considered the remaining points on appeal. Each contention made is not only unsupported by the record, but is affirmatively refuted thereby.

The judgment appealed is accordingly affirmed.

CARROLL, DONALD K., C. J., and WIGGINTON and RAWLS, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was charged in an information filed in the Circuit Court of Okaloosa County with the offense of issuing a worthless check. After a trial by jury in which he was represented by counsel, appellant was convicted and sentenced to serve a term of imprisonment in the State prison. It is from the judgment and sentence that this appeal is taken.

Appellant’s principal point on appeal alleges a denial of due process occasioned by the trial court’s refusal to cause subpoenas to be issued to witnesses whose testimony was deemed necessary to establish appellant’s innocence. The record fails to support this contention. It nowhere appears that the issuance of witness subpoenas was requested by appellant either before or during the trial. Nor does the record.reveal any objection by appellant to being placed on trial without the presence of witnesses whose testimony was considered necessary to his defense.

We have carefully considered the remaining points on appeal. Each contention made is not only unsupported by the record, but is affirmatively refuted thereby.

The judgment appealed is accordingly affirmed.

CARROLL, DONALD K., C. J., and WIGGINTON and RAWLS, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

151 So. 2d 68, 1963 Fla. App. LEXIS 3504, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/parrish-v-state-fladistctapp-1963.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack