Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

176 So. 2d 118

Mills v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1965-06-01

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently January 1966

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1965-06-01

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PER CURIAM.

¶1The appellant seeks reversal of a conviction of unlawfully breaking and entering" a dwelling house without a dangerous-weapon with intent to commit a felony, to wit: robbery and robbery, for which he-was sentenced to a term of fifteen years in-, the State Penitentiary.

¶2Appellant contends that he is entitled to a reversal on two grounds: (1) the trial judge committed reversible error in denying his motion to suppress his palm prints, as evidence; (2) it was reversible error to-admit the testimony relating to events occurring subsequent to the date of the al*119leged offense for which the appellant was tried.

¶3We have carefully considered these contentions in the light of the briefs and the record on appeal and have found no reversible error. Therefore, the judgment and sentence are affirmed.

¶4Affirmed.

/176/so2d/118 · .json · Public domain