SYLVIAN DALE BISHOP, 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.
Florida Supreme Court affirmed two first-degree murder convictions with sentences reduced from death to life imprisonment under Furman v. Georgia.
The convictions for two counts of first-degree murder are affirmed with sentences reduced from death to life imprisonment pursuant to Furman v. Georgia.
[1] Where jurisdiction attached when a case was capital at the time notice of appeal was filed, the Supreme Court retains jurisdiction for all purposes even after sentences a…
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 intelligenceBishop was convicted of two counts of first-degree murder without recommendation of mercy in Indian River County Circuit Court and received two death …
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 Of Evidence cases and more on FLexlaw
The appellant was convicted of two counts of murder in the first degree without recommendation of mercy in the Circuit Court, Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, in and for Indian River County, Florida, and received two sentences of death. Subsequently, under the authority of Furman v. Georgia, 408 U.S. 238, 92 S.Ct. 2726, 32 L.Ed.2d 346 (1972), the Supreme Court of Florida in Anderson et al. v. State, 267 So.2d 8 (Fla.1972), reduced appellant’s sentences from death to life imprisonment. At the time the notice of appeal was filed in this cause, this court had jurisdiction because, at such time this case was a capital case. Since our jurisdiction attached, we retained jurisdiction for all purposes. Anderson et al. v. State, supra.
In the exercise of our discretion, we have dispensed with oral argument pursuant to Rule 3.10(e), 32 F.S.A., Florida Appellate Rules.
We have examined and considered the record in this case in the light of briefs filed and have also, pursuant to Florida *832Appellate Rule 6.16(b), reviewed the evidence to determine if the interests of justice require a new trial, with the result that we find no reversible error is made to appear and the evidence does not reveal that the ends of justice require a new trial to be awarded.
Accordingly, the convictions, as previously modified by reduction of appellant’s sentences from death to life imprisonment, are hereby affirmed.
It is so ordered.
CARLTON, C. J., and ROBERTS, ERVIN, ADKINS, BOYD, McCAIN, and DEKLE, TJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Sylvian Dale Bishop v. Louie L. Wainwright, 511 F.2d 664 (5th Cir. 1975)…v. Wainwright, 424 F. 2d 177 (5th Cir. 1970). Affirmed. . The Florida Supreme Court commuted the sentence from death to life imprisonment on the authority of Furman v. Georgia, 408 U.S. 238, 92 S.Ct. 2726, 33 L.Ed.2d 346 (1972). Bishop v. Florida, 276 So. 2d 831 (Fla. 1973). . The errors alleged in this habeas corpus attack were also alleged in Bishop’s brief on the direct appeal. The Florida Supreme [*666] Court did not treat these allegations specifically, but stated only that “no reversible error is mad…
Authorities Cited
- Furman v. Georgia, 408 U.S. 238 (U.S. 1972)
- Earnest Eugene Anderson v. State, 267 So. 2d 8 (Fla. 1972)