Holzapfel v. State
District Court of Appeal of Florida
1Per curiam
On the basis of our review of the briefs and the record on appeal, we are of the opinion that the appellant has .failed to demonstrate reversible error. The final order from which this appeal is taken is, therefore, affirmed. See Thomas v. State, Fla.App.1968, 206 So.2d 475; Hield v. State, Fla.App.1967, 201 So.2d 235; McMann v. Richardson, 1970, 397 U.S. 759, 90 S.Ct. 1441, 25 L.Ed.2d 763; Maxwell v. State, Mo.1970, 459 S.W.2d 388; Busby v. Holman, 5 Cir.1966, 356 F.2d 75; State v. McInnes, Fla.App.1961, 133 So.2d 581; Mann v. State, Fla.App.1968, 209 So.2d 472; Coleman v. State,…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- McMann v. RichardsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- David Busby v. William C. Holman, Warden, Kilby PrisonCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1966
- Manning v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1967
- State v. McInnesDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1961
- Claude Cauley v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1966
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.