Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

522 So. 2d 1028

522 So.2d 1028

13 Fla.L.Weekly 869

Ashley v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1988-04-05

Relies on 471 So. 2d 9 - Bundy v. State · 458 So. 2d 1150 - Taylor v. State · 438 So. 2d 936 - Williams v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1988-04-05

How this case has been cited

Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently February 2014

16 state decisions

701988199020002010decided

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.

¶1We affirm the defendant’s conviction and sentence. In so doing, we reject his contentions that the trial court erred by (1) refusing to suppress certain eyewitness identification testimony which the defendant claims was the result of an impermissi-bly suggestive show up, see Taylor v. State, 458 So.2d 1150 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984); Williams v. State, 438 So.2d 936 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); (2) instructing the jury that the defendant’s flight upon his arrest could be considered in assessing his guilt, see Bundy v. State, 471 So.2d 9 (Fla.1985); and (3) arguably sentencing the defendant to seven years’ imprisonment under an invalid scoresheet showing a guideline sentence of seven to nine years rather than five and one-half to seven years, where the record clearly reflects the trial court’s intention to impose a seven year sentence under the correct scoresheet.

¶2Affirmed.

/522/so2d/1028 · .json · Public domain