IVORY SIMMONS, 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 Florida appellate court affirmed the defendant's convictions for robbery and assault with intent to commit murder in the first degree, finding substantial competent evidence supported the trial court's guilty findings.
A conviction will be affirmed when the record contains substantial competent evidence to support the trial court's findings of guilt.
[1] A judgment of conviction arrives in the appellate court with a presumption of correctness, and the appellate court's duty is to examine whether substantial competent evid…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceSimmons was charged by information with robbery and assault with intent to commit murder in the first degree. He pleaded not guilty, waived jury trial…
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 Presumption Of Correctness Of Judgment cases and more on FLexlaw
The defendant was convicted of the crimes of robbery and assault with intent to commit murder in the first degree by the trial court.
The defendant was charged by information with robbery and assault with intent to commit murder in the first degree. He pleaded not guilty and waived jury trial. The trial judge found the defendant guilty on both counts and sentenced him to terms of twenty and ten years in the State penitentiary, to run concurrently. Defendant’s motion for new trial was denied and this appeal followed.
Appellant seeks reversal of his conviction on the ground that the state failed to present legally sufficient evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is the perpetrator of the crimes for which he was convicted.
The judgment of conviction arrives in this court with a presumption of correctness. Crum v. State, Fla.App.1965, 172 So.2d 24; Bruton v. State, Fla.App.1969, 220 So.2d 669. It is our duty to examine the record to see if there is substantial competent evidence to support the findings of the trier of the facts.
*148We have carefully considered appellant’s point on appeal, in the light of the record, briefs and argument of counsel and have concluded that the record contains evidence sufficient to support the findings of the trier of the facts. State v. Sebastian, Fla.1965, 171 So.2d 893.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Wooten v. State, 271 So. 2d 812 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973)…ellant’s contentions, in light of the record on appeal and briefs, and have concluded that the judgments of conviction are supported by sufficient competent evidence and that no reversible error has been demonstrated. Simmons v. State, Fla.App.1970, 236 So. 2d 147; Wetherington v. State, Fla.App.1972, 263 So. 2d 294. Therefore, the judgments and sentences appealed from are hereby affirmed. Affirmed. . Our appellate jurisdiction to review a conviction for a misdemeanor, i. e., petit larceny, vests pursuant t…
-
Simmons v. State, 296 So. 2d 507 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See: Simmons v. State, Fla. App.1970, 236 So. 2d 147, and Geiger v. State, Fla.App.1969, 228 So. 2d 449.…
-
Davis v. State, 354 So. 2d 1220 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978)…mstances, did not impose the sentence in such a mechanistic or non-individualized manner as to be illegal. Further, we have considered appellant’s second point on appeal and, likewise, conclude that it is without merit. See, e. g., Simmons v. State, 236 So. 2d 147 (Fla.3d DCA 1970); Johnson v. State, 225 So. 2d 440 (Fla.1st DCA 1969); Zide v. State, 225 So. 2d 349 (Fla.1st DCA 1969), and Wright v. State, 182 So. 2d 264 (Fla.3d DCA 1966). Therefore, the final judgment and sentence appealed are affirmed. Affir…
Authorities Cited
- Crum v. State, 172 So. 2d 24 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965)
- State v. Sebastian, 171 So. 2d 893 (Fla. 1965)
- Dawson v. State, 220 So. 2d 669 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969)
- Bruton v. State, 220 So. 2d 669 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969)