Roysdon v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Roysdon v. State

437 So. 2d 156, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 21506

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJuly 8, 1983

DocketNo. 82-1905

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 437 So. 2d 156 (Roysdon 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

Roysdon v. State, 437 So. 2d 156, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 21506 (Fla. Ct. App. 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

James Roysdon appeals his judgment and sentence for second degree murder. While we find no merit in appellant’s numerous contentions, we are disturbed by the trial court’s identification of appellant’s crime as “MURDER IN THE FIRST DEGREE, [section] 782.04(la) [sic],” a “First” degree felony, “(MURDER IN THE SECOND DEGREE, as included).” Because we find this description somewhat confusing, we remand appellant’s judgment for correction to reflect his adjudication for murder in the second degree under section 782.04(2), Florida Statutes (1981). Otherwise, we affirm appellant’s conviction and sentence in all respects.

REMANDED for proceedings consistent with this opinion.

OTT, C.J., and BOARDMAN and DAN-AHY, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

James Roysdon appeals his judgment and sentence for second degree murder. While we find no merit in appellant’s numerous contentions, we are disturbed by the trial court’s identification of appellant’s crime as “MURDER IN THE FIRST DEGREE, [section] 782.04(la) [sic],” a “First” degree felony, “(MURDER IN THE SECOND DEGREE, as included).” Because we find this description somewhat confusing, we remand appellant’s judgment for correction to reflect his adjudication for murder in the second degree under section 782.04(2), Florida Statutes (1981). Otherwise, we affirm appellant’s conviction and sentence in all respects.

REMANDED for proceedings consistent with this opinion.

OTT, C.J., and BOARDMAN and DAN-AHY, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

437 So. 2d 156, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 21506, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/roysdon-v-state-fladistctapp-1983.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack