Case ID: so2d_193/html/0479-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM. PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Gloria BROWN and Iviry Rosetta Brinson, Appellants, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 7076.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida. Second District.
    Nov. 23, 1966.
    On Rehearing Dec. 28, 1966.
    Rehearing Denied Jan. 27, 1967.
    Robert E. Jagger, Public Defender, Frank H. White, Asst. Public Defender, and Carleton L. Weidemeyer, Asst. Public Defender, Clearwater, for appellants.
    Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and William D. Roth, Asst. Atty. Gen., Lakeland, for appellee.
   PER CURIAM.

Gloria Brown and Iviry Rosetta Brinson appeal from judgments and sentences entered upon a jury verdict finding them guilty of robbery.

We note from the record that the judgments and sentences were entered December 29, 1965. Prior to this date a motion for new trial had been filed and denied. The notice of appeal of both defendants was filed April 1, 1966, which is 92 days from the dates of the judgments and sentences. Notice of appeal was, therefore, untimely filed and this court sua sponte dismisses the appeal.

Dismissed.

ALLEN, C. J., SHANNON, J., and ADKINS, JAMES C., Jr., Associate Judge,, concur.

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING

PER CURIAM.

The petition for rehearing filed by the appellants states:

“1. That on the 23rd day of November A.D. 1966 this Honorable Court dismissed the above-styled appeal with the assumption that said appeal was taken from a judgment and sentence dated 29 December 1965 and that the notice of appeal was-filed by the appellants ninety-two days thereafter.
“2. That said dismissal was based on-misinformation or erroneous factual matter before the court as is evident from, the certified exhibits attached hereto and expressly incorporated herein.”

We dismissed the above case because the record then before us showed that the appeal was taken 92 days from the date of the judgments and sentences.

From data supplied by the appellants in-the petition for rehearing, and upon reconsideration, we have determined that we were in error and have now concluded that the appeal was timely taken.

We, therefore, grant the petition for rehearing and vacate the opinion filed November 23, 1966, case number 7076. This •case having been orally argued and briefed, we will proceed to the merits of the case.

We have considered the points argued by the appellants and find that they raise no reversible error.

Affirmed.

ALLEN, C. J., SHANNON, J., and ADKINS, JAMES C., Jr., Associate Judge, •concur.