Toranco v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Toranco v. State

471 So. 2d 1355, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1628, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 14892

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJuly 2, 1985

DocketNo. 83-2030

StatusPublished

This text of 471 So. 2d 1355 (Toranco 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

Toranco v. State, 471 So. 2d 1355, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1628, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 14892 (Fla. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was tried by the court without a jury and convicted and sentenced for the crimes of burglary of a structure with a firearm and robbery with a firearm.

[1356]*1356Appellant seeks reversal of the convictions and sentences on the grounds that 1) double jeopardy barred his subsequent prosecution for the instant offenses which were initially raised, but later withdrawn by the state, as a basis for revoking his probation; 2) the court erred in permitting the admission into evidence of a witness’ prior inconsistent statement which was not revealed during discovery, although it was referred to in a police report furnished to defense counsel prior to trial; and 3) the circumstantial evidence was insufficient to support his convictions.

The grounds relied on by appellant for reversal have been considered in the light of the record, briefs and arguments of counsel and we find that no reversible error has been demonstrated. The record shows that the verdict is supported by the evidence and that the rulings of the trial court challenged by appellant do not constitute harmful error. See Green v. State, 463 So.2d 1139 (Fla.1985); Brumbley v. State, 453 So.2d 381, 384-85 (Fla.1984); State v. Young, 217 So.2d 567, 571 (Fla.1968), cert. denied, 396 U.S. 853, 90 S.Ct. 112, 24 L.Ed.2d 101 (1969); State v. Justice, 451 So.2d 1056 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984); State v. Jones, 425 So.2d 178 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983); State v. Banks, 418 So.2d 1059, 1060 (Fla. 2d DCA), pet. for rev. denied, 424 So.2d 760 (Fla.1982); Floyd v. State, 361 So.2d 802 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978), cert. denied, 368 So.2d 1366 (Fla.1979).

Therefore, the judgments of conviction and sentences are affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was tried by the court without a jury and convicted and sentenced for the crimes of burglary of a structure with a firearm and robbery with a firearm.

[1356]*1356Appellant seeks reversal of the convictions and sentences on the grounds that 1) double jeopardy barred his subsequent prosecution for the instant offenses which were initially raised, but later withdrawn by the state, as a basis for revoking his probation; 2) the court erred in permitting the admission into evidence of a witness’ prior inconsistent statement which was not revealed during discovery, although it was referred to in a police report furnished to defense counsel prior to trial; and 3) the circumstantial evidence was insufficient to support his convictions.

The grounds relied on by appellant for reversal have been considered in the light of the record, briefs and arguments of counsel and we find that no reversible error has been demonstrated. The record shows that the verdict is supported by the evidence and that the rulings of the trial court challenged by appellant do not constitute harmful error. See Green v. State, 463 So.2d 1139 (Fla.1985); Brumbley v. State, 453 So.2d 381, 384-85 (Fla.1984); State v. Young, 217 So.2d 567, 571 (Fla.1968), cert. denied, 396 U.S. 853, 90 S.Ct. 112, 24 L.Ed.2d 101 (1969); State v. Justice, 451 So.2d 1056 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984); State v. Jones, 425 So.2d 178 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983); State v. Banks, 418 So.2d 1059, 1060 (Fla. 2d DCA), pet. for rev. denied, 424 So.2d 760 (Fla.1982); Floyd v. State, 361 So.2d 802 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978), cert. denied, 368 So.2d 1366 (Fla.1979).

Therefore, the judgments of conviction and sentences are affirmed.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

471 So. 2d 1355, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1628, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 14892, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/toranco-v-state-fladistctapp-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack