Bell v. State (1973)

See, e.g., Bell v. State, 289 So. 2d 388, 391 (Fla. 1973) (“It is the long standing rule of this Court that when assignments of error are not argued in the briefs they will be deemed abandoned unless jurisdictional or fundamental error appears in the record.”) (emphasis added); Hendricks v. State, 34 So. 5 3d 819, 828 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010) (“Despite Appellant’s failure to argue fundamental error, we consider whether the purported error is of a fundamental nature because it is …

See, e.g., Bell v. State, 289 So. 2d 388, 391 (Fla. 1973) (“It is the long standing rule of this Court that when assignments of error are not argued in the briefs they will be deemed abandoned unless jurisdictional or fundamental error appears in the record.”) (emphasis added); Hendricks v. State, 34 So. 3d 819, 828 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010) (“Despite Appellant’s failure to argue fundamental error, we consider whether the purported error is of a fundamental nature because it is an…

Bell v. State , 289 So.2d 388 , 391 (Fla. 1973) ("It is the long standing rule of this Court that when assignments of error are not argued in the briefs they will be deemed abandoned unless jurisdictional or fundamental error appears in the record."); see also Mordenti v. State , 630 So.2d 1080 , 1084 (Fla. 1994) (holding that fundamental error must be "equivalent to a denial of due process"); Randall v. Griffin , 204 So.3d 965 , 967 (Fla. 5th DCA 2016) ("Appellate courts ma…

Bell v. State , 289 So.2d 388 , 391 (Fla. 1973) ("It is the long standing rule of this Court that when assignments of error are not argued in the briefs they will be deemed abandoned unless jurisdictional or fundamental error appears in the record."); see also Mordenti v. State , 630 So.2d 1080 , 1084 (Fla. 1994) (holding that fundamental error must be "equivalent to a denial of due process"); Randall v. Griffin , 204 So.3d 965 , 967 (Fla. 5th DCA 2016) ("Appellate courts ma…

Bell v. State, 289 So.2d 388, 391 (Fla.1973) (“It is the long standing rule of this Court that when assignments of error are not argued in the briefs they will be deemed abandoned unless jurisdictional or fundamental error appears in the record.”).

Furthermore, the statutory definition as written has been held to "convey a sufficiently definite warning of proscribed conduct when measured by common understanding and practice." Bell v. State, 289 So.2d 388, 390 (Fla.1973).

See Purvis v. State, 377 So.2d 674, 675 (Fla.1979)(§ 827.04(3), Fla. Stat. (1977)); State v. Shamrani, 370 So.2d 1, 2 (Fla. 1979)(§ 827.04(3), Fla. Stat. (1977)); Bell v. State, 289 So.2d 388, 389 (Fla. 1973)(§ 828.21, Fla.Stat.(1971)); State v. Lindsay, 284 So.2d 377, 379-381 (Fla. 1973)(§ 828.19, Fla.Stat.(1971)); State v. Barone, 124 So.2d 490, 492-493 (Fla. 1960)(§ 828.21, Fla.Stat.(1959)).

Corp., 372 U.S. at 32 , 83 S.Ct. at 597 ; accord Sandstrom v. Leader, 370 So.2d 3, 6 (Fla.1979); see also Bell v. State, 289 So.2d 388, 390 (Fla.1973) (criminal statute need not furnish detailed plans and specifications to comply with constitutional requirements).

Warren, 572 So.2d at 1377 ; see also Bell v. State, 289 So.2d 388 (Fla.1973).

United States v. Powell, 423 U.S. 87, 94 , 96 S.Ct. 316, 321 , 46 L.Ed.2d 228 (1975); see also Bell v. State, 289 So.2d 388, 390 (Fla.1973) (criminal statute need not furnish detailed plans and specifications of conduct prohibited to comply with constitutional requirements).

See Bell v. State, Fla., 289 So.2d 388 , opinion filed December 20, 1973; Kenneth v. Barber, Fla. 1947, 159 Fla. 81 , 31 So.2d 44 . *689 Therefore, for the reasons stated and upon the authorities cited, the order appealed is affirmed.