Opinion ID: 1981890
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Failure to Properly Exercise Discretion

Text: Appellant's next contention is that the trial court erred in consistently denying defense motions without making necessary findings of fact and without exercising discretion. Appellant asserts that the trial court was in a tremendous hurry to get the case over with, and contends that the trial judge made his rulings in a summary fashion without exercising proper discretion. The jury was sequestered throughout the two week trial and sentencing, so the trial court's desire to expedite the trial was justified. Indeed, Appellant's complaint on appeal is not with the pace of the trial, but with the court's series of snap rulings totally devoid of legal or factual support. As will be discussed in the balance of this opinion, none of the challenged trial rulings constituted reversible error. While it might have been a better practice to do so, it was not necessary for the trial judge to state for the record his preliminary fact findings or underlying reasons for those rulings.