Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Jernigan v. State

Supreme Court of Florida

Decided October 29, 1969No. 37989Published

1Concurrence

MANN, District Court Judge

(concurring specially):

There is in this record no allegation that Jernigan was prejudiced either by the trial court’s denial of continuance of the failure to furnish Jernigan, then indigent, counsel on appeal and to advise him of his rights to appeal.

Jernigan was represented by two privately engaged lawyers, who moved for continuance but no reason is shown why the granting of the continuance would have made them better prepared for trial, and this is not to be presumed. I find no decision of this Court, solicitous as it has been for the rights of the unprepared…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Aubrey Pate v. William C. Holman, Warden, Kilby Prison, AlabamaCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1965
  2. Watson v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1964
  3. Keith v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1969

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API