Scott v. State
253 So. 2d 454
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Scott v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 256 So. 2d 19 →
Opinion
We have carefully examined the briefs and record-on-appeal in this case, oral argument having been waived. We find no reversible error.
In particular, we do not find the out-of-court photographic identification of defendant by the victim to be violative of the due process standards set forth in Simmons v. United States, 1968, 390 U.S. 377, 88 S.Ct. 967, 19 L.Ed.2d 1247. See also Jenkins v. State, Fla.App.1969, 228 So.2d 114.
The decision appealed from is, therefore, affirmed.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Scott v. State, 253 So. 2d 454 (Fla. Ct. App. 1971).
253 So. 2d 454 (Scott v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Simmons v. United States
390 U.S. 377 (Supreme Court, 1968)
Jenkins v. State
228 So. 2d 114 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1969)