D'Agostino v. State, 74--1628
| Decision Date | 02 June 1976 |
| Docket Number | No. 74--1628,74--1628 |
| Citation | 334 So.2d 99 |
| Parties | Joseph Peter D'AGOSTINO, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Sandstrom & Hodge, Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.
Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Joel D. Rosenblatt, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Before BARKDULL, C.J., and PEARSON and HENDRY, JJ.
Appellant, defendant below, appeals his conviction and sentence, including probation, for unlawfully and feloniously breaking and entering a building with intent to commit a felony therein, aggravated assault, and possession of burglary tools. Appellee was the prosecution below.
An appellant, on an appeal in a criminal case, has the burden of showing that the trial proceedings were so infected with prejudicial error as to compel a reversal of the judgment. Such error must be clearly demonstrated by the appellant. See, e.g., Bryan v. State, Fla.App.1973, 279 So.2d 332; Stephens v. State, Fla.App.1973, 279 So.2d 331; Blackman v. State, Fla.App.1973, 279 So.2d 99; and see 2 Fla.Jur., Appeals § 358. In the instant appeal, we have carefully considered the entire record, all the numerous points raised in the briefs, and arguments of counsel in the light of the controlling principles of law, and have concluded that no reversible error has been demonstrated. The jury was supported in its verdict by substantial evidence and no error was committed which injuriously affected any substantial right of appellant. Therefore, for the reasons stated and upon the authorities cited, the judgment and sentence appealed are affirmed.
Affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Harrell v. State
...burden to the State. Section 924.33, Fla.Stat. (1979). 3 See, e. g., White v. State, 356 So.2d 56 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978); D'Agostino v. State, 334 So.2d 99 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976), cert. denied, 341 So.2d 1080 Under the facts of this case, we find that appellant has failed to demonstrate federal co......
-
Borges v. State
...the opinion that the two are distinct and separate crimes for which two convictions and two sentences are proper. See D'Agostino v. State, 334 So.2d 99 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976). Section 810.06 of the Florida Statutes (1979) defines the separate crime of possession of burglary tools and only requi......
-
Livingston v. State
...2d DCA 2004) ("The burden of proof on appeal lies with the appellant to demonstrate that the trial court erred."); D'Agostino v. State , 334 So.2d 99, 99 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976) ("An appellant, on an appeal in a criminal case, has the burden of showing that the trial proceedings were so infected......
-
Buckbee v. State
...sentencing, and that the defendant was not only entirely aware of that fact, but affirmatively acquiesced in it. See D'Agostino v. State, 334 So.2d 99 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976), cert. denied, 341 So.2d 1080 (Fla.1977); Pickman v. State, 155 So.2d 646 (Fla. 3d DCA 1963), cert. denied, 164 So.2d 805......