Martin v. State

The appellant was informed against, charged with robbery. Tried before a jury, he was convicted and was adjudged guilty. Appealing therefrom he presents eight points as grounds for reversal. On consideration thereof, in the light of the record and briefs, we find no reversible error is shown, and affirm.

The trial court ruled correctly in rejecting the proffered testimony of two psychiatrists, where “the unsupported statement of the defendant was the major substantial fact if not the whole foundation” of the doctors’ opinions. Cirack v. State, Fla.1967, 201 So.2d 706. We find no harmful error…