Wright v. State

207 So. 2d 519, 1968 Fla. App. LEXIS 5960
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided March 5, 1968·No. No. 67-235·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellant was convicted after a non-jury trial of robbery and sentenced to ten years in the State prison. On this appeal the point presented urges that the appellant was denied a fair trial because he was entitled to inspection at trial of a prosecution witness’ statement for the purpose of cross examination. The statement was not introduced into evidence or used by the witness in testifying. This point has been decided adversely to the appellant. See McAden v. State, 155 Fla. 523, 21 So.2d 33 (1945); Jackman v. State, Fla.App.1962, 140 So.2d 627; State v. McCall, Fla.App.1966, 186 So.2d 324.

Affirmed.

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

Wright v. State, 207 So. 2d 519, 1968 Fla. App. LEXIS 5960 (Fla. Ct. App. 1968).

207 So. 2d 519 (Wright v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Braswell v. State
230 So. 2d 192 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1970)
Anderson v. State
207 So. 2d 520 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1968)