Vertree v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Vertree v. State

168 So. 2d 771

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedNovember 17, 1964

DocketNo. E-329

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 168 So. 2d 771 (Vertree 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

Vertree v. State, 168 So. 2d 771 (Fla. Ct. App. 1964).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellant was convicted of two independent crimes and filed separate motions under Criminal Procedure Rule No. 1, F.S.A. ch. 924 Appendix, to vacate the separate judgments of conviction and sentences imposed thereon. Appellant sued out a single appeal to review the orders of denial in both cases. This procedure was irregular but the court, mindful of the fact that the [772]*772appeal was sued out in proper person and in an abundance of caution, treated the same as independent appeals and consolidated the causes for the purposes of the appeal, which is the posture of the pleadings of appellant.

The appeal having been perfected and the court having carefully reviewed the record and finding no error, the orders appealed, which were entered in cases Nos. 1371 and 1373, according to the serial numbers of the trial court, entered on April 26, 1963, and July 1, 1963, respectively, are severally

Affirmed.

STURGIS, C. J, and WIGGINTON and CARROLL, DONALD K., JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

The appellant was convicted of two independent crimes and filed separate motions under Criminal Procedure Rule No. 1, F.S.A. ch. 924 Appendix, to vacate the separate judgments of conviction and sentences imposed thereon. Appellant sued out a single appeal to review the orders of denial in both cases. This procedure was irregular but the court, mindful of the fact that the [772]*772appeal was sued out in proper person and in an abundance of caution, treated the same as independent appeals and consolidated the causes for the purposes of the appeal, which is the posture of the pleadings of appellant.

The appeal having been perfected and the court having carefully reviewed the record and finding no error, the orders appealed, which were entered in cases Nos. 1371 and 1373, according to the serial numbers of the trial court, entered on April 26, 1963, and July 1, 1963, respectively, are severally

Affirmed.

STURGIS, C. J, and WIGGINTON and CARROLL, DONALD K., JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

168 So. 2d 771, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/vertree-v-state-fladistctapp-1964.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack