Williams v. State, 305 So. 2d 45 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974). · Go Syfert
Search
Williams v. State, 305 So. 2d 45 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
4 citation events across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Rollins v. State (fladistctapp, 1998-02-25)
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Rollins v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1998 · confidence medium
See Franqui v. State, 699 So.2d 1332, 1334 (Fla.1997), petition for cert. filed, ___ U.S. ___, 118 S.Ct. 1337 , ___ L.Ed.2d ___ (1998); Karp v. State, 698 So.2d 577, 578 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997); Fruetel v. State, 638 So.2d 966, 972 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994); Jones v. State, 582 So.2d 110 , 111 (Fla. 3d DCA), appeal dismissed, 592 So.2d 681 (Fla.1991); Harris v. State, 564 So.2d 1211, 1212 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); Griffin v. State, 502 So.2d 1350, 1352 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987); Scott v. State, 396 So.2d 271, 271 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); Williams v. State, 305 So.2d 45, 46 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974).
Freddie WILLIAMS
v.
STATE of Florida
No. U-356.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
Aug 22, 1974.
305 So. 2d 45
Louis O. Frost, Jr., Public Defender, and James O. Brecher, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant., Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Michael M. Corin, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appel-lee.
Boyer, McCord, Theron, Yawn.
Cited by 4 opinions  |  Published

CORRECTED OPINION

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, defendant below, raises three points on this appeal from judgment of guilt and resulting sentence following a verdict by which a jury found him guilty of aggravated battery.

The record reveals that during the trial the trial judge repeatedly injected himself into the trial and on at least one instance took over the cross examination of a witness, taking the cross examination beyond the scope of the direct examination. Although we do not condone the action of the trial judge, being of the opinion that in the absence of unusual circumstances justice will best be accomplished in our adversary system of jurisprudence by leaving[*46] the examination and cross examination of witnesses to the attorneys for the parties, nevertheless in the case sub judice the record reveals that there was no objection during the trial to questions and actions of the trial judge, and since such were not so flagrant as to constitute fundamental error, and finding the remaining points to be without merit, the judgment and sentence appealed is

Affirmed.

BOYER, Acting C. J., McCORD, J., and YAWN, THERON A., Jr., Associate Judge, concur.