BENJAMIN A. HOLLAND, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Anders V. California Procedure cases and more on FLexlaw
This court, proceeding in the manner outlined and recommended by the Supreme Court of the United States in Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493, having deferred ruling on a motion of the public defender to withdraw as counsel for the indigent defendant-appellant, and having furnished appellant with a copy of the public defender’s memorandum brief, and having allowed the appellant a reasonable specified time within which to raise any points that he chose in support of this appeal, and the appellant *336having filed his response thereto, on consideration thereof upon full examination of the proceedings we conclude that the appeal is wholly frivolous. Whereupon, the public defender’s said motion to withdraw is granted, and the order or judgment appealed is hereby affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
McMULLEN v. State, 331 So. 2d 357 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976)…efore it was incumbent upon the accused to show by competent proof continuous availability. The Court of Appeal found merit in the State’s contention reciting that the record in that case was “lacking any proof to establish continuous availability” (278 So. 2d 335). On the contrary, sub judice the record is filled with proof that appellant •was continuously available. Not only did the uncontradicted proof establish that appellant was continuously physically available, but it also established that repeated inq…
Authorities Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967)