CLEVELAND HOLLINGSHEAD, APPELLANT,
v.
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 court held that there was no reversible error in the trial proceedings, and therefore declined to issue the writ of habeas corpus.
Appellant sought appellate review of a robbery conviction via habeas corpus, following a Supreme Court order. An attorney was appointed, and all possi…
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 Appellate Review cases and more on FLexlaw
Pursuant to the opinion of the Supreme Court of Florida in Hollingshead v. Wainwright,1 this Court entered its order affording to Hollingshead, in the name of habeas corpus, the opportunity of full appellate review of his judgment of conviction of robbery in the Court of Record, Escambia County, Florida, on June 9, 1963. We appointed Joe Harrell, Esquire, to serve as Appellant’s attorney in this proceeding, and he has ably performed his responsibilities by presenting to this Court every possible grievance that Hollingshead might have suffered in the trial of the cause.
We have considered at length the trial proceedings, the transcript of record and the briefs of the parties, and conclude that the eight points on appeal urged by Appellant are without merit. Suffice it to say that there was ample substantial evidence to support the verdict of the jury, which *352was fairly instructed as to the applicable law.
This Court having afforded Hollingshead a full appellate review in the name of habe-as corpus and having found an absence of reversible error as to the trial of the cause, we, therefore, decline to issue the writ.
RAWLS,' Acting C. J., JOHNSON and SPECTOR, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Cleveland Hollingshead v. Louie L. Wainwright, 423 F.2d 1059 (5th Cir. 1970)…corpus law that a federal district court is required to conduct a hearing if the material facts were not adequately developed at the state court hearing. Townsend v. Sain, supra. The state proceeding, Hollingshead v. State of Florida, Fla.App.1967, 205 So. 2d 351, contains not even a hint of express findings of fact regarding his present claim that he was inadequately represented. If the petitioner’s allegations taken as true (as they must be) assert a constitutional violation, a hearing was required. Holli…1 / 2
Authorities Cited
- Cleveland Hollingshead v. Louie L. Wainwright, 194 So. 2d 577 (Fla. 1967)
- Hollingshead v. Wainwright, 384 U.S. 31 (U.S. 1966)
- State v. Diamond, 188 So. 2d 788 (Fla. 1966)