Soto v. State
This text of 232 So. 2d 455 (Soto 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.
Opinion
The appellant, the defendant below, appeals from a conviction of the crime of robbery (hold up of a supermarket). On considering the appellant’s contentions, in the light of the record and briefs, we find no error, and affirm. The evidence as to identification was sufficient. Positive identification testimony was given at trial by several witnesses. In the circumstances disclosed the in-court identification testimony was not tainted by the witnesses’ prior out of court identification of the defendant. See Anderson v. State, Fla.App. 1968, 215 So.2d 618; Allen v. State, Fla.App.1969, 219 So.2d 444.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
232 So. 2d 455, 1970 Fla. App. LEXIS 6847, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/soto-v-state-fladistctapp-1970.