Royster v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Royster v. State

148 So. 3d 147, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 15253, 2014 WL 4853497

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 1, 2014

Docket2D13-905

StatusPublished

This text of 148 So. 3d 147 (Royster 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

Royster v. State, 148 So. 3d 147, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 15253, 2014 WL 4853497 (Fla. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

MORRIS, Judge.

Davone Lamar Royster appeals his judgments for first-degree murder, attempted armed robbery with a firearm or deadly weapon, and attempted first-degree murder. He also appeals his life sentence with the possibility of parole on the first-degree murder conviction. He first argues that the trial court erred by refusing to require the State to provide immunity to a State witness or to suffer a judgment of acquittal. We affirm that issue without further comment. We also affirm on the second issue, regarding the legality of his life sentence with the possibility of parole, which is controlled by our recent opinion in Rodriguez-Giudicelli v. State, 143 So.3d 947 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014).

Affirmed.

DAVIS, C.J., and KHOUZAM, J., Concur.

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

MORRIS, Judge.

Davone Lamar Royster appeals his judgments for first-degree murder, attempted armed robbery with a firearm or deadly weapon, and attempted first-degree murder. He also appeals his life sentence with the possibility of parole on the first-degree murder conviction. He first argues that the trial court erred by refusing to require the State to provide immunity to a State witness or to suffer a judgment of acquittal. We affirm that issue without further comment. We also affirm on the second issue, regarding the legality of his life sentence with the possibility of parole, which is controlled by our recent opinion in Rodriguez-Giudicelli v. State, 143 So.3d 947 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014).

Affirmed.

DAVIS, C.J., and KHOUZAM, J., Concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

148 So. 3d 147, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 15253, 2014 WL 4853497, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/royster-v-state-fladistctapp-2014.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack