CORNELL BERNARD CONLEY, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 4th DCA | 1976-10-01
No. 75-1821
DOWNEY and ALDERMAN, JJ., and DANAHY, PAUL W., Jr., Associate Judge, concur.
338 So. 2d 541 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (1976)

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.


Holding

The court held that the trial court erred in denying the motion for judgment of acquittal based on insufficient evidence of conspiracy to commit robbery.


Facts & Procedural History

Appellant was convicted of robbery, conspiracy to commit robbery, and assault and battery. The appellate court reviewed the record for sufficiency of …

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was convicted of robbery, conspiracy to commit robbery, and assault and battery. Three points have been raised on this appeal, one of which has merit.

From our examination of the record on appeal we conclude that the trial court erred in denying appellant’s motion for judgment of acquittal, based upon insufficiency of the evidence to prove the existence of a conspiracy to commit robbery.1 Appellant’s conviction of conspiracy to commit robbery is reversed.

We have considered the other points raised by this appeal and find no reversible error. Appellant’s convictions for robbery and assault and battery are affirmed.

Affirmed in part and reversed in part and remanded with instructions that appellant’s conviction and sentence of conspiracy to commit robbery be vacated.

DOWNEY and ALDERMAN, JJ., and DANAHY, PAUL W., Jr., Associate Judge, concur. . The Attorney General, in his brief, asserts that appellant admitted in a statement to police that he committed the conspiracy. However the record on appeal does not support this assertion. In order to maintain credibility with the court, appellate counsel should not make factual assertions not supported by the record on appeal.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw