Person v. State

245 So. 3d 1002
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided May 16, 2018·No. No. 3D17–799·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. G.E.G. v. State, 417 So.2d 975 (Fla. 1982) (holding a defendant convicted of possession of a controlled substance cannot complain on appeal that the state failed to introduce the substance into evidence unless the defendant preserved this *1003claim by objecting at trial to its non-introduction); McHolder v. State, 917 So.2d 1043, 1045 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006) (stating "McHolder argues that his due process rights were violated by his conviction of possession of cocaine with intent to sell because the State never introduced the cocaine evidence at trial. Because this argument was not made to the trial court, it was not preserved for appellate review"). See also Trinidad v. State, 615 So.2d 806 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993) ; Priestly v. State, 450 So.2d 289 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984).

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

Person v. State, 245 So. 3d 1002 (Fla. Ct. App. 2018).

245 So. 3d 1002 (Person v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

McHolder v. State
917 So. 2d 1043 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2006)
Trinidad v. State
615 So. 2d 806 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1993)
Priestly v. State
450 So. 2d 289 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1984)
G. E. G. v. State
417 So. 2d 975 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1982)