Campbell v. State, 79-1720
| Citation | 386 So.2d 629 |
| Decision Date | 13 August 1980 |
| Docket Number | No. 79-1720,79-1720 |
| Parties | Ronald Eugene CAMPBELL, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. /T4-703. |
| Court | Court of Appeal of Florida (US) |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Seminole County; Volie A. Williams, Jr., Judge.
Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender, and Polly M. Shull, Asst. Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.
Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Gregory C. Smith, Asst. Atty. Gen., Daytona Beach, for appellee.
This is an appeal from a conviction after a nolo contendere plea in a robbery case. Appellant pleaded nolo contendere and specifically reserved the right to appeal the denial of a motion to suppress certain evidence seized without a warrant. We do not decide this issue on appeal because, even if we were to reverse the order denying the suppression, the state has other evidence and eye witness testimony with which to try the appellant. Thus the issue is not dispositive of the case.
This type of appeal falls within the dictates of Brown v. State, 376 So.2d 382 (Fla.1979), and State v. Ashby, 245 So.2d 225 (Fla.1971).
AFFIRMED.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Finney v. State
...738 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980) (dismissing appeal without affording appellant right to withdraw his plea entered after Brown); Campbell v. State, 386 So.2d 629 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980) (affirming without addressing nondispositive suppression issue); Webb v. State, 373 So.2d 400 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979) (affi......
-
Ruiz v. State, 81-1127
...See Cantrell v. State, 403 So.2d 977 (Fla.1981) (defendants charged with violation of the Florida RICO Act); Campbell v. State, 386 So.2d 629 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980) (defendant charged with robbery). And, while the Second District Court of Appeal has intimated that the refusal to suppress contr......
-
Rentz v. State, 1D18-3617
...additional evidence the State could have used to take the case to trial without the evidence from the wiretap); Campbell v. State , 386 So. 2d 629, 629 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980) (a motion to suppress was not dispositive where the State had other evidence and eyewitness testimony with which it cou......
-
Foster v. State
...the appeal of the ruling on the motion." M.N. v. State, 16 So.3d 280, 281 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) (en banc); see, e.g., Campbell v. State, 386 So.2d 629, 629 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980) ("We do not decide [the trial court's denial of appellant's motion to suppress] because, even if we were to reverse th......