Case ID: so2d_224/html/0413-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Arthur RICKS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 69-120.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.
    July 1, 1969.
    Robert L. Koeppel, Public Defender, and Gregory B. Hoppenstand, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.
    Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., and Melvin Grossman, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
    Before PEARSON, HENDRY and SWANN, JJ.
   PER CURIAM.

As to appellant’s first point on appeal regarding whether sufficient evi-4ence existed to support the trial court’s finding that the assault appellant was convicted for was committed with a deadly weapon, this question is one for the trier of fact. Blitch v. State, Fla.App.1967, 194 So.2d 1. As to appellant’s second point on appeal, that the proof adduced at trial was materially at variance with the information by virtue of the fact that the information charged the appellant with assaulting his victim by use of a brick, whereas proof at trial tended to show that the assault was committed with a rock, we find this contention to be without merit.

Affirmed.