Case Name: Michael DECCA, a/k/a Mike Decca, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1966-05-10
Citations: 186 So. 2d 92
Docket Number: No. 65-858
Parties: Michael DECCA, a/k/a Mike Decca, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: Before HENDRY, C. J., and PEARSON and BARKDULL, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 186
Pages: 92–93

Head Matter:
Michael DECCA, a/k/a Mike Decca, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 65-858.
District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.
May 10, 1966.
Rehearing Denied May 26, 1966.
Harvey J. St. Jean and Lawrence E. Hoffman, Miami Beach, for appellant.
Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., and Herbert P. Benn, First Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Before HENDRY, C. J., and PEARSON and BARKDULL, JJ.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
The appellant seeks review of a conviction entered by the trial court in a non-jury trial, upon the charge of unlawful possession and sale of marijuana.
The State produced one witness and the defendant took the stand in his own behalf and offered an alibi. Subsequently, the trial court found him guilty and this appeal ensued.
In his brief, the appellant says:' " it is obvious that the uncorroborated testimony of one man, in effect, was- the basis of the conviction herein." In light of the opinion of the Supreme Court of Florida, in State v. Sebastian, Fla.1965, 171 So.2d 893, and in the opinion of this court, in Wright v. State, Fla.App.1966, 182 So.2d 264, this is no reason to find reversible error. The appellant also urges that the State should have been required to reveal the name of the confidential informant who led the State's witness to the time and place where the purchase of marijuana was completed. We reject this contention. The defendant's alibi could have been established by other witnesses.
Therefore, the conviction, adjudication, and sentence, here under review is hereby affirmed.
Affirmed.