Pirant v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Pirant v. State

790 So. 2d 1187, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 10278, 2001 WL 830056

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided July 25, 2001·No. No. 2D00-2127·Published

Opinion

SALCINES, Judge.

Robert Pirant appeals his convictions for possession of cocaine with intent to sell and possession of cannabis. Trial counsel failed to preserve for appellate review the trial court’s denial of the motion to suppress and the denial of the motion for judgment of acquittal. Therefore, we do not decide the merit of these issues. See Pendarvis v. State, 752 So.2d 75, 76-77 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000).

Affirmed.

ALTENBERND, A.C.J., and DANAHY, PAUL W., (Senior) Judge, Concur.

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

SALCINES, Judge.

Robert Pirant appeals his convictions for possession of cocaine with intent to sell and possession of cannabis. Trial counsel failed to preserve for appellate review the trial court’s denial of the motion to suppress and the denial of the motion for judgment of acquittal. Therefore, we do not decide the merit of these issues. See Pendarvis v. State, 752 So.2d 75, 76-77 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000).

Affirmed.

ALTENBERND, A.C.J., and DANAHY, PAUL W., (Senior) Judge, Concur.

Pirant v. State, 790 So. 2d 1187, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 10278, 2001 WL 830056 (Fla. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

790 So. 2d 1187 (Pirant v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related