¶1AFFIRMED on the authority of Heiney v. State, 447 So.2d 210 (Fla.1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 920, 105 S.Ct. 303, 83 L.Ed.2d 237 (1984); Rose v. State, 425 So.2d 521 (Fla.1982), cert. denied, 461 U.S. 909, 103 S.Ct. 1883, 76 L.Ed.2d 812 (1983); In Re: Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases, 431 So.2d 594, 595 (Fla. 1981) citing with approval Holland v. United States, 348 U.S. 121, 75 S.Ct. 127, 99 L.Ed. 150 (1954); Herman v. State, 472 So.2d 770 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985), rev. denied, 482 So.2d 348 (Fla.1986); Dunn v. State, 454 So.2d 641 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984); Bouler v. State, 389 So.2d 1197 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980). The evidence was sufficient to support the jury’s verdict. Tibbs v. State, 397 So.2d 1120 (Fla.1981), aff’d., 457 U.S. 31, 102 S.Ct. 2211, 72 L.Ed.2d 652 (1982).
512 So. 2d 1146
Wheeler v. State
District Court of Appeal of Florida
Decided September 24, 1987
District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1987-09-24
Relies on Holland v. United States · Tibbs v. Florida · Heiney v. Florida
Decided 1987-09-24