Spann v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Spann v. State

339 So. 2d 275, 1976 Fla. App. LEXIS 15669

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Spann v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 340 So. 2d 1215 →

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided November 12, 1976·No. No. 75-1084·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The only meritorious point raised on appeal is whether the testimony by a state’s witness that appellant did not make a statement to the police officer after he was advised of his rights constituted fundamental error. There was no objection to the testimony at trial. On the basis of Clark v. State, 386 So.2d 468 (Fla.2d D.C.A.1976), we hold that it was not fundamental error.

AFFIRMED.

McNULTY, C. J., and BOARDMAN and SCHEB, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

The only meritorious point raised on appeal is whether the testimony by a state’s witness that appellant did not make a statement to the police officer after he was advised of his rights constituted fundamental error. There was no objection to the testimony at trial. On the basis of Clark v. State, 386 So.2d 468 (Fla.2d D.C.A.1976), we hold that it was not fundamental error.

AFFIRMED.

McNULTY, C. J., and BOARDMAN and SCHEB, JJ., concur.

Spann v. State, 339 So. 2d 275, 1976 Fla. App. LEXIS 15669 (Fla. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

339 So. 2d 275 (Spann v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.