KENNETH M. FOUNTAIN, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The appellate court affirmed a conviction for attempted incest and lewd assault on a minor, finding sufficient evidence for both charges despite the appellant conceding guilt for the second offense. The court rejected the argument that the two charges were legally incompatible.
Yes, the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction for attempted incest. No, the two offenses are not legally repugnant.
“We have [*46] carefully examined the record and briefs, and hold there was sufficient evidentiary support for the judgment of guilt of attempted incest.”
Establishes the court's finding regarding the sufficiency of evidence for the attempted incest conviction.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceKenneth M. Fountain was charged with attempted incest and lewd, lascivious, or indecent assault on a female minor. He was tried without a jury and fou…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Concurrent Sentences cases and more on FLexlaw
The appellant Kenneth M. Fountain was charged in separate informations with attempted incest and with lewd, lascivious or indecent assault upon a female minor under the age of fourteen years without the intent to commit rape. Pie was tried without a jury and found guilty of both offenses. He was sentenced to two years confinement in the state penitentiary for each offense, with provision for the sentences to be served concurrently. On this appeal it was conceded on behalf of the appellant that the evidence sustained the conviction for the second offense, but contended that the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction for the first offense. We have *46carefully examined the record and briefs, and hold there was sufficient evidentiary support for the judgment of guilt of attempted incest. No useful purpose would be served by reciting here the sordid facts which the record discloses. We reject as unsound the argument made on behalf of the appellant that the crimes charged are repugnant, and that conviction on the second precludes conviction for attempted incest. No reversible error having been made to appear, the judgments appealed from are hereby affirmed.
Affirmed.