Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

131 So. 136

Britt v. State

Decided December 2, 1930

Relies on State ex rel. Hampton v. McClung

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1930-12-02

How this case has been cited

Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently March 1993

2 federal appellate · 8 state decisions

601930194019501960197019801990decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Per Curiam.

¶1 In this cause Mr. Chief Justice Terrell, Mr. Justice Brown and Mr. Justice Buford are of the opinion that the judgment of the court below should be reversed, while Mr. Justice Whitfield, Mr. Justice Ellis *1387 and Mr. Justice Strum are of opinion that said judgment should be affirmed. When it appears that the members of the Court are permanently and equally divided in opinion as to whether a judgment should be affirmed or reversed, and there is no prospect of an immediate change in the personnel of the Court, the judgment should be affirmed; therefore, it is considered, ordered and adjudged under the authority of State ex rel. Hampton v. McClung, 47 Fla. 224, 47 So. R. 51, that the judgment of the circuit court in this cause be and the same is hereby affirmed.

Terrell, C. J., and Whitfield, Ellis, Strum, Brown and Buford, J. J., concur.
/131/so/136 · .json · Public domain