History
  • No items yet
midpage
Van Fripp v. State
412 So. 2d 915
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.
1982
Check Treatment
PER CURIAM.

We affirm the order revoking defendant’s probation together with the trial court’s decision not to disqualify itself after the defendant had suggested that the trial judge was a material witness. The two affidavits which accompanied defendant’s motion for disqualification failed to demonstrate conclusively that the trial judge possessed relevant information “going to some fact affecting the merits of the cause and about which no other witness might testify.” Wingate v. Mach, 117 Fla. 104, 157 So. 421, 422 (1934). See also State ex rel. Slora *916v. Wessel, 403 So.2d 496 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981) (Hurley, J., concurring specially).

In addition, we find no abuse of discretion in the trial court’s denial of defendant’s motion to set aside his plea and conviction. Accordingly, both orders are AFFIRMED.

LETTS, C. J., and DOWNEY and HURLEY, JJ., concur.

Case Details

Case Name: Van Fripp v. State
Court Name: District Court of Appeal of Florida
Date Published: Apr 14, 1982
Citation: 412 So. 2d 915
Docket Number: No. 81-660
Court Abbreviation: Fla. Dist. Ct. App.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.