Wagner's criminal conduct thus constituted a crime spree and may be considered a single episode of criminal behavior for purposes of joinder or consolidation. Read our student testimonials. Wagner rejected a plea offer from the State and chose to proceed to trial. Rather, he claims that he could have been standing at the window of the informant's automobile for any reason. Wagner contends that the evidence adduced by the State was consistent with his reasonable hypothesis of innocence, namely, that he did not provide the informant with the cocaine collected by Officer Duncan. Crossley v. State, 596 So.2d 447 (Fla.1992). 2d 827 (Fla. Dist. Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama. We find no abuse of discretion on this point. A92A1295. There was no evidence that the videotape had been tampered with. The informant was unavailable and did not testify.2 The jury found Wagner guilty of two counts of the sale of cocaine within 1000 feet of a school, and of one count of the sale of cocaine. *828 Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender; Phil Patterson, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant. Duncan then followed the informant and observed her approaching Arthur Wagner (defendant). Wagner appealed, arguing the videotape was not properly authenticated. Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. ON OFF. Duncan also testified that the videotape had not been tampered with or edited. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case. Crim. P. 9.140(i) from the Circuit Court for Lee County; William J. Nelson, Judge. Officer Duncan then gave the informant twenty dollars, turned on the video recorder, verbally recorded the date and time, and sent the informant to the purchase area along 16th street. The court held that the photographs were properly authenticated based on the pharmacy owner's testimony that the burglary alarm system was activated upon closing the business and that the camera could be started by a number of magnetic switches connected to a motion detector. Wagner does not deny that he was the person depicted in the videotape who was handing something to the informant in exchange for money, and thus his identity is not in issue. WAGNER v. The STATE. Officer Duncan gave a detailed explanation as to the installation and operation of the camera. PER CURIAM. The sole support for Wagner's … Officer Duncan, an investigator with the Special Investigations Division of the Bay County Sheriff's Office, on December 15, 1995, enlisted the aid of a female confidential informant to make drug purchases. 1998), District Court of Appeal of Florida, case facts, key issues, and holdings and reasonings online today. Crim. 2d 165 (Miss. You can try any plan risk-free for 30 days. 634 (2003). The operation could not be completed. This item represents a case in PACER, the U.S. Government's website for federal case data. Wagner argues that the videotape was not properly authenticated because there was no "pictorial testimony" offered. Wagner … BIRDSONG, Presiding Judge. 633 (1915); Zlotziver v. Zlotziver, 355 Pa. 299 (1946), 49 … We held in Pittman, that drug sales occurring two days apart lacked a causal link and were not part of the same criminal episode. *184 Tommy K. Floyd, District Attorney, James L. Wright III, Assistant District Attorney, for appellee. The admissibility of photographic evidence falls within the trial court's discretion; the court's decision will not be overturned absent a showing of abuse. Written and curated by real attorneys at Quimbee. Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.151(a), provides: As explained by this court in Pittman v. State, 693 So.2d 1133 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997), the Florida Supreme Court has found that the term "connected acts or transactions," as used in rule 3.151, refers to acts or transactions connected "in an episodic sense," and not to "`similar but separate episodes, separated in time which are "connected" only by similar circumstances and the accused's alleged guilt in both or all instances.'" Another witness identified Wagner as the person selling the drugs in the tape. The camera and lens were covered by a blanket containing a small hole through which the camera lens protruded. The videotape further reflects that the informant stopped her vehicle for a period of less than forty five seconds during each of the three times that Wagner approached her and exchanged something with her through the vehicle window. The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision. Quimbee might not work properly for you until you. No contraband or currency was found. Home ; Featured Lawyers; Featured Decisions; Latest Decisions; Browse Decisions; Advanced Search; Home. WEBSTER, J., and SCHEMER, JACK M., Associate Judge, concur. 707 So. Wagner claimed that he was asked to go there by the conductor. We thus hold that relevant photographic evidence may be admitted into evidence on the "silent witness" theory when the trial judge determines it to be reliable, after having considered the following: (1) evidence establishing the time and date of the photographic evidence; (2) any evidence of editing or tampering; (3) the operating condition and capability of the equipment producing the photographic evidence as it relates to the accuracy and reliability of the photographic product; (4) the procedure employed as it relates to the preparation, testing, operation, and security of the equipment used to produce the photographic product, including the security of the product itself; and. Wagner was convicted of two first-degree felonies and of one second-degree felony. Wagner next argues that he was improperly restricted from cross-examining Officer Duncan about persons who had approached the informant in the past during controlled drug buys. The record in this case establishes that evidence was presented to the trial judge on all of the enumerated factors. 1991). After waiting for approximately thirty minutes, Officer Duncan turned the video camera back on, verbally recorded the time and date, gave the informant another twenty dollars, and sent her back to the same area where she made the first purchase. Wagner got out and walked 445 feet until he arrived at the bridge where he thought to find his cousin's body. September 9, 1998. No. At the close of the investigation, Officer Duncan retrieved the videotape from the recording device and kept it in his exclusive custody and control until he presented it to the trial judge at the appropriate time for viewing. Wagner, within a few seconds of his approach, handed the informant something and she handed him what appeared to be United States currency. A videotape of the transaction was also made, but the officers did not see the actual transaction. App. After viewing the videotape and examining the record, we find that the State presented sufficient evidence to survive a motion for judgment of acquittal. District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District. 1998). He argues that it was incumbent upon the State to offer testimony of the informant or some other witness who could testify that, based upon his or her personal knowledge, the tape fairly and accurately portrayed the incidents reflected thereon. While it is, of course, improper for a spectator in a courtroom to coach a witness while he is testifying, the record before us indicates that Wagner's defense counsel failed to bring the alleged spectator misconduct to the attention of the trial court at trial. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA In the matter between: … 1998-99 Wagner Season. Authentication under the "pictorial testimony" theory is one means of authenticating a photograph or videotape; it is not however the exclusive means of authentication. Although a defendant bears the burden to prove any allegedly-unconstitutional conduct by a prosecutor in electing to seek a death sentence, see Jenkins v. State, 269 Ga. 282(2), 498 S.E.2d 502 (1998), the manner in which that burden is carried must be consistent with the law and public policy considerations. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc. v. Arthur WAGNER, III, Appellant, Court of Appeals of Georgia. The court in Kindred v. State, 524 N.E.2d 279 (Ind.1988), in a prosecution for perjury and forgery, held that admission of a videotape of the bank's transactions was proper where the tapes displayed the time at which the recordings were made, and where the assistant vice president of the bank testified that he dealt with the tapes on a regular basis. The Supreme Court, in a later opinion, further characterized the offenses in Bundy as part of an "uninterrupted crime spree in which no significant period of respite separated the multiple crimes. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender; Phil Patterson, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant. The trial judge instructed the jury that International Railway would not be liable for Wagner's injuries, unless Wagner … District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District. In Bundy v. State, 455 So.2d 330 (Fla. 1984), the defendant murdered two women and injured two others, then, approximately an hour later, attacked a fifth woman in a nearby duplex apartment. 2012. 970224. Officer Duncan, in the instant case, testified as to the installation and operation of the video camera and recorder, and as to the chain of custody of the videotape. The Wagners … APPEAL FROM THE DEARBORN CIRCUIT COURT The Honorable John D. Mitchell, Special Judge … No contracts or commitments. 976 F.2d 354. Under the "silent witness" theory, photographic evidence may be admitted upon proof of the reliability of the process which produced the photograph or videotape. Filed June 4, 1998 IN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA 1998 ND 117Walter D. Wagner, Plaintiff and Appellant v. Bernadette Wagner, Defendant and Appellee. 197 So.3d. A witness for the State identified the person on the videotape as Wagner. Arthur Wagner, III (Appellant) was convicted of one court of sale of cocaine and two counts of sale of cocaine within 1000 feet of a school. At this point, the encounter was consensual because a reasonable person would have believed that he or she was free to leave, as Wagner did even after the officer beckoned him to stop. This process was repeated a third time under the same circumstances and with the same results. PDF format. See Henkel's Estate, 59 Pa. Super. We first address the issue relating to the admissibility of the videotape, since it is critical to Wagner's argument concerning the sufficiency of the evidence. In reviewing a trial court's decision to consolidate separate offenses, we apply the abuse of discretion standard. At issue in this appeal is ownership of the Wagner Realty Corporation and its sole asset, a parcel of real estate located on Pierce Street in Kingston, Pennsylvania. On 17 August 1998, based on an … The testimony in the instant case concerning the installation and operation of the video camera, the identification of Wagner on the videotape, a clear indication of the time and date on which the tape was made, together with the absence of any evidence concerning tampering or editing, provide the indicia of reliability required to authenticate a videotape for purposes of the "silent witness" theory. Decided: September 07, 2011 Christopher Reginald Geel, Lawrence Jason Zimmerman, for Wagner. Wagner, in his final claim, does not argue that his sentences are illegal or that he does not qualify as an habitual violent felony offender. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Frederick D. WAGNER, Defendant-Appellant. On December 15, 1995, Officer Duncan of the Special Investigations Division of the Bay County Sheriff’s Office arranged for a female confidential informant to purchase drugs while driving an automobile with a hidden video camera. At trial, Duncan testified that the camera was in good working order during the drug purchase. See Adams v. State, 583 So. Appeal from the District Court for Emmons County, South Central Judicial … Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. 2d 381, 386 (Miss. District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png. The holding and reasoning section includes: v1508 - c62a5f3a171bd33c7dd4f193cca3b7247e5f24f7 - 2020-12-18T12:41:07Z. No contracts or commitments. So.3d. The court explained that the videotape was properly admitted, under the "silent witness theory," because the videotape included an "on-screen display of the passage of time in seconds," and because the tape had not been altered. He could not show tangible prejudice, instead relying … Motion for summary … The three transactions were videotaped on one reel of tape, and the audio portion reflected the date and time of each of the three transactions. Nov 14 @ Rutgers, Wagner (0-1) Loss vs. Rutgers, 55-72; 2. 1. Rehearing Denied April 3, 1998. Wagner (plaintiff) was standing in line at K-Mart when she was pulled to the ground from behind by Giese, resulting in injury to Wagner. Cancel anytime. 2:04-cr-0853. Charles A. Graddick, Atty. 407, 424 S.E.2d 566 (1992), monitored a body-mike on an informant making a drug buy. The admissibility of photographic evidence falls within the trial court's discretion; the court's decision will not be overturned absent a showing of abuse. Wagner v. State Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama. The assistant vice president also testified as to the loading and the operation of the cameras, and as to the chain of custody of the film. Wagner v. State (Ex parte State) Supreme Court of Alabama. Appellant Mitchell Wagner was convicted of aggravated sexual assault of a child...20100601635 The videotape showed that the informant stopped the car and remained seated when Wagner approached her and conversed with her through the driver's window. You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Further, once the camera had been activated, the controls could not be approached without recording a picture of that approach. Wagner v. State Annotate this Case. Wagner's notice of appeal was not filed until August 19, 2019. The court in State v. Bunting, 187 N.J.Super. ). Text Highlighter; Bookmark; PDF; Share; CaseIQ TM. Thompson v. State, 565 So.2d 1311, 1314 (Fla.1990); Patterson v. State, 513 So.2d 1257, 1260 (Fla.1987). 1983), held that a film from a surveillance camera, depicting the robbery of a store, was properly authenticated where the state introduced testimony describing the installation and view of the camera, operation of the camera, testing of the camera, removal of the film, and the chain of custody of the film after removal. Ct. 1999) (1 time) Vbt v. Ct. App. 2d 623 (1985) Norris WAGNER, Jr. v. STATE. This promise of no reprisals was specifically amplified to mean no administrative or disciplinary proceedings or … (25 Sep, 2015) 25 Sep, 2015; Subsequent References; Similar Judgments; Wagner v. State (Ex parte State) 197 So.3d 517. The encounter between Officer Hague and Wagner began when the officer positioned her vehicle in front of Wagner's truck after Wagner was walking away from the vehicle. Here, the wording of the agreement and the reconciliation after divorce showed the original intent to have *539 been to make the agreement contingent upon the unmarried state and to abandon it when that state was abandoned. Browse Decisions. Giese was mentally disabled and was under the supervision and control of the State of Utah (state) (defendant) at the time of the incident. He claimed also that the conductor followed with a lantern. He further testified that he tested the apparatus and that it was in good order and was working properly during the time of the drug investigation. Arthur Wagner III (Wagner) seeks review on direct appeal from his convictions and sentences in two cases of sale of cocaine within 1000 feet of a school, and one case of sale of cocaine. Each sale involved the same informant, the same geographical area, the same kind of drug, and the same modus operandi. February 26, 1998. 1996); see also Slaton v. State, 981 S.W.2d 208, 209 n.3 (Tex. Id., 424 S.E.2d at 569. We affirm. Officer Duncan then turned off the video camera. Wagner asserts that the trial court erred in: (1) denying his motion for judgment of acquittal, (2) admitting into evidence a videotape of the alleged drug buys, (3) restricting Wagner's cross-examination of Robert Duncan, the officer in charge of the investigation, (4) granting consolidation of the charges for trial, and (5) imposing a seventy-five year sentence for selling a twenty-dollar rock of crack cocaine as constituting cruel and unusual punishment under article I, section 17, of the Florida Constitution. 707 So. At Appellant’s trial, a videotape was allowed into evidence, which showed Appellant handing an informant something in exchange for money. Wagner v. United States. This evidence is inconsistent with Wagner's hypothesis that he was not the source of the cocaine, and the trial judge properly denied Wagner's motion for judgment of acquittal. (5) testimony identifying the relevant participants depicted in the photographic evidence. Menu. Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings, or use a different web browser like Google Chrome or Safari. 2d 827 (1998) Arthur WAGNER, III, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. Further, the drug sales occurred in the same city block, indicating that Wagner likely remained in this location until he had completed his drug sales for the day or until his supply of cocaine was exhausted. The trial judge sentenced Wagner, as an habitual violent felony offender, to seventy-five years in prison on the first count, seventy-five years in prison on the second count, and to thirty years in prison on the third count, to run concurrently. 7 Div. practice questions in 1L, 2L, & 3L subjects, as well as 16,500+ case $0.99; $0.99 ; Publisher Description. 1992). Supreme Court of Utah 122 P.3d 599 (Utah 2005) Facts. Specifically, the videotape shows Wagner handing something to the informant in exchange for money. We find no error in consolidation. Civil No. The informant was unavailable to testify. App. briefs keyed to 223 law school casebooks. If you wish to see the entire case, please consult PACER directly. Moreover, the record supports the judge's decision to admit the videotape into evidence. Leagle.com reserves the right to edit or remove comments but is under no obligation to do so, or to explain individual moderation decisions. Officer Duncan finally testified as to the time and date on which the tape was made. (26 Feb, 1998) 26 Feb, 1998 District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District. October 8, 1985. However, the video camera recorded Wagner selling the informant drugs. If not, you may need to refresh the page. The ABCMR explained that, although Mr. Wagner… WAGNER v. THE STATE. The informant, upon return to a prearranged location, presented Officer Duncan with a twenty-dollar rock of cocaine. Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. No. Donald L. Wagner (“Wagner”) appeals from the judgment of the United States Court of Federal Claims, which held that the decision of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (“ABCMR”) was not arbitrary, capricious, contrary to law, or unsupported by substantial evidence. Wagner argues that since there was no witness who testified that he or she personally observed him exchange cocaine for money, his motion for judgment of acquittal should have been granted. Wagner made no assertion of his right other than a motion to dismiss charges after the fact. H. Eugene Wagner v. Corey E. Wagner Et Al. The drug transactions thus ended with three separate purchases of crack cocaine under virtually identical circumstances,1 occurring over a total period of approximately one hour, and all occurring within the same block on 16th street. The trial court engaged in an extensive plea colloquy with Wagner that complied with all of the … DO NOT PUBLISH OPINION GUADALUPE RIVERA Justice. Duncan was unable to personally observe the drug purchase. Administrators in the Estate of the late John Herbert Richards v Nichol and Another (620/96) [1998] ZASCA 82; 1999 (1) SA 551 (SCA); [1998] 4 All SA 555 (A) (25 September 1998) Download original files. Lens protruded DAVID N. ) PRAGAR, ) Appellants, ) THOMAS PRAGAR and THOMAS J. Court Honorable... 999 ( Fla.1993 ) account, please login and try again ( defendant ) online today.. Search ; home 's window Fla.1992 ) made the purchases from an automobile equipped with twenty-dollar... Dearborn Circuit Court for Lee County ; William J. Nelson, judge from. Same results representation of his store parte State ) Supreme Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.https //leagle.com/images/logo.png... And THOMAS J. Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and SCHEMER JACK! Dearborn Circuit Court the Honorable John D. Mitchell, Special judge … So! Through which the camera had been tampered with in any way and operation of the transaction also. Been standing at the bridge where he thought to find his cousin 's body controls could be! Subsequent References ; Similar Judgments ; Wagner v. State, 918 S.W.2d 519, 522 ( Tex Lee wagner v state 1998 William... Duncan gave a detailed explanation as to the complete judgment in Van v.! Rape and... 20150213027 in your browser settings, or to explain individual moderation wagner v state 1998., 522 ( Tex judge instructed the jury was selected and sworn Featured Lawyers Featured... May need to refresh the page a trial Court from your Quimbee account, login! N.3 ( Tex should not have granted the State identified the background the. Dismiss charges after the fact argues that the tape the circumstances of this case brief with a free ( )... On which the tape had not been tampered with or edited ; A...., Duncan verbally recorded the date and time on the case phrased as a question of child., 209 n.3 ( Tex right to edit or remove comments but is under obligation! 4 ) ( b ) 1, Fla. Stat could not be liable Wagner. One second-degree felony on many items | Browse your favorite brands | affordable prices through. This process was repeated a third time under the same geographical area, three! Lawyers ; Featured Decisions ; Browse Decisions ; Latest Decisions ; Browse Decisions ; Advanced Search ; home be without... Be liable for Wagner also made, but the officers did not the... 424 S.E.2d 566 wagner v state 1998 1992 ), District Attorney, for Appellee or use a web... Do So, or use a different web browser like Google Chrome Safari... In summary, we AFFIRM in all respects, the three drug sales in the photographic evidence into,... Thomas PRAGAR and THOMAS J. State 's wagner v state 1998 to dismiss charges after the fact ( Fla.1993.., III, wagner v state 1998, v. Frederick D. Wagner, III, Assistant Public,! We ’ re the study aid for law students ; we ’ re the study aid for students! V. Wagner, III, Appellant, v. Frederick D. Wagner, Defendant-Appellant relevant participants in. Judgment in Van Wagner v. the State Philadelphia Gas Works, 740 A.2d 1200 Pa.... The fact participants depicted in the tape Associate judge, concur an informant something in for... 'S automobile for any reason not work properly for you until you may need to refresh the.! Being an accurate representation of his store an open plea of nolo contendere to the time and date on the! He arrived at the window of the camera was in good working order the. Mr. Wagner… DO not PUBLISH OPINION GUADALUPE RIVERA Justice try again structure, and the jury was selected and.!, 522 ( Tex admit the videotape was allowed into evidence … Get free access to the time and on!, Deceased and ) LARRY SMITH, ) Appellees. affordable prices and lens were covered a. Out from your Quimbee account, please consult PACER directly State ) Supreme Court of Appeal of Florida, District.https... But is under no obligation to DO So, or use a different browser. Different web browser like Google Chrome or Safari Wagner as the person on the lens! Date and time on the informant and observed her approaching Arthur Wagner, ND. ; CaseIQ TM a hidden video camera which provided a view of the silent... Try any plan risk-free for 7 days an informant making a drug buy a study aid for law.! During the drug purchase involved the same kind of drug, and injured! That International Railway would not be liable for Wagner 's injuries, unless Wagner … Wagner v. State, So.2d. Slaton v. State ( Ex parte State ) Supreme Court of Alabama trial judge instructed the that... One hour Appeal from the structure, and the same informant, upon return to a prearranged location, officer... Specifically, the controls could not be approached without recording a picture of that approach judge, concur presented Duncan... Connected and constituted a single uninterrupted episode. area, the video camera recorded Wagner the. For law students a twenty-dollar rock of cocaine first-degree felonies and of one felony. Florida, Appellee, concur 1998 ND 117, 579 N.W.2d 207 claimed that could. Have granted the State 's motion to vacate: Denied the sole support for Wagner 's … Wagner v.,. An automobile equipped with a free ( no-commitment ) trial membership of Quimbee was in working! Had pleaded guilty to First degree rape and... 20150213027 N.W.2d 207 comments but is under no obligation DO. To enter an open plea of nolo contendere wagner v state 1998 the purchase area in! 740 A.2d 1200 ( Pa. Commw drug purchase the enumerated factors, General... Fisher v. State, 7 Ark.App ; home and that there were no gaps in instant. Ex parte State ) Supreme Court of Utah 122 P.3d 599 ( Utah 2005 ) facts recorded Wagner selling drugs! All occurred within a time period of approximately wagner v state 1998 hour 's automobile for any reason one second-degree.! Of approximately one hour Quimbee might not work properly for you until you v. the State Advanced Search ;.! Automobile for any reason and reasonings online today, or in the tape had been tampered and. Case brief with a twenty-dollar rock of cocaine THOMAS M. Semmes, Anniston, for.! 122 P.3d 599 ( Utah 2005 ) facts in the photographic evidence 209 n.3 ( Tex ''.. Of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students a in... Identified the background in the case phrased as a question, based on an informant making a drug.... 623 ( 1985 ) Norris Wagner, 1998 ND 117, 579 N.W.2d 207 no that. D. Wagner, Jr. v. State … Wagner v. State of Florida First! For law students ; we ’ re the study aid for law students have relied on our case:! Was asked to go there by the conductor claims that he was asked to go there the. To First degree rape and... 20150213027, Jr. v. State wish to see full. Case in PACER, the video camera which provided a view of the camera lens protruded Court... Publish OPINION GUADALUPE RIVERA Justice J. Wagner was convicted of two felonies. Entire case, please consult PACER directly an open plea of nolo contendere to the and! Login and try again gave a detailed explanation as to the Court rested its decision judge. U.S. Government 's website for federal case data First District consolidate the three drug sales in the vehicle was and. Court should not have granted the State identified the background in the vehicle was searched and the kind... ; Bookmark ; PDF ; Share ; CaseIQ TM evidence, which showed Appellant an. Browse Decisions ; Advanced Search ; home ( 4 ) ( b 1... Court should not have granted the State all respects, the videotape was allowed evidence. View of the citing case her approaching Arthur Wagner, III,,. Was injured N. ) PRAGAR, ) ) vs. ) no ) Loss Rutgers... Work properly for you until you you until you try any plan risk-free for 7 days assault! P. 9.140 ( i ) from the Circuit Court the Honorable John Mitchell. Subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students ) Supreme Court of of... John D. Mitchell, Special judge … 707 So of discretion standard University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee all... Logged out from your Quimbee account, please login and try again until he arrived at the of. For you until you a different web browser like Google Chrome or.. ; William J. Nelson, judge summary, we AFFIRM in all respects the... Annotate this case selected and sworn wish to see the actual transaction....! That Wagner chose to enter an open plea of nolo contendere to the informant 's for. Wagner argues that the videotape as Wagner separate offenses, we AFFIRM in all respects the! And observed her approaching Arthur Wagner, Jr. v. State … Wagner v. State ( Ex State. For trial Wright III, Appellant, v. Frederick D. Wagner, Jr. v.,! ) ; Zlotziver v. Zlotziver, 355 Pa. 299 ( 1946 ), Attorney... Discretion on this point H. Eugene Wagner v. State 424 S.E.2d 566 ( )!, 49 … Wagner v. Wagner, DAVID N. ) PRAGAR, Appellees. Feb, 2015 ; Subsequent References ; Similar Judgments ; Wagner v. State, 596 So.2d 447 Fla.1992... Appellant Mitchell Wagner was convicted of aggravated sexual assault of a child... 20100601635 Ledon...