Sokol v. State

217 So. 2d 843, 1969 Fla. App. LEXIS 6391
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided January 14, 1969·No. No. 68-556·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a conviction of bribery as set forth in § 838.011, Fla.Stat., F.S.A. The information was originally quashed by the trial judge, but his decision was reversed by this court. See State v. Sokol, Fla.App.1968, 208 So.2d 156. Upon [844] trial of the cause by the court, the appellant was found guilty and sentenced to one year imprisonment.

On this appeal the appellant questions the sufficiency of the evidence, particularly the evidence concerning intent, to sustain the conviction.

An examination of the record reveals the evidence to be sufficient to sustain the conviction. The totality of circumstances establishes the criminal intent of the appellant beyond a reasonable doubt. Therefore, the judgment and sentence are affirmed upon authority of Zalla v. State, Fla.1952, 61 So.2d 649; Eizenman v. State, Fla.App.1961, 132 So.2d 763; Crum v. State, Fla.App.1965, 172 So.2d 24. See also State v. Sebastian, Fla.1965, 171 So.2d 893.

Affirmed.

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

Sokol v. State, 217 So. 2d 843, 1969 Fla. App. LEXIS 6391 (Fla. Ct. App. 1969).

217 So. 2d 843 (Sokol v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

G.D. v. State
828 So. 2d 1075 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2002)