Stalnaker v. State

Supreme Court of Florida
Stalnaker v. State, 136 So. 318 (Fla. 1931)
102 Fla. 638
Davis, Buford, Whitfield, Ellis, Terrell, Brown

Stalnaker v. State

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.

— This cause having heretofore been submitted to the Court upon the transcript of the record of the judgment herein, and briefs and argument of counsel for the respective parties, and the record having been seen and inspected, and the Court being now advised of its judgment to be given in the premises, it seems to the Court that there is no error in the said judgment; it is, therefore, considered, ordered and adjudged by the Court that the said judgment of the Circuit Court be, and the same is hereby affirmed.

Buford, C.J., and Whitfield, Ellis and Terrell, J.J., concur. *639 Brown and Davis, J.J., dissent.

Dissenting Opinion

Brown, J.,

dissenting: — The court based its judgment upon the fifth count, which was in my opinion legally defective and should have been so held on the demurrer thereto. See third headnote in Mortellar v. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co., 91 Fla. 230, 107 So. 528.

Davis, J., concurs.

Reference

Full Case Name
Leo Stalnaker, Plaintiff in Error, vs. State of Florida, Defendant in Error
Cited By
2 cases
Status
Published