Martin v. Martin
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT July Term 2010 ANTONIO JOSEPH MARTIN, Appellant, v. CHERYL REINHOLD MARTIN, Appellee. No. 4D09-2805 [September 22, 2010] PER CURIAM. The final judgment of dissolution is affirmed. The husband has failed to furnish a transcript, without which he has failed to demonstrate error in the factual findings that the court made and to which he objects. See Applegate v. Barnett Bank, 377 So. 2d 1150, 1152 (Fla. 1979). Where the record contains no transcript of the trial, an appellate court can address only errors that appear on the face of the final judgment. See Wofford v. Wofford, 20 So. 3d 470, 474 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009). However, even with a transcript we would conclude that the errors he complains of were not errors at all. Most of his complaints center around his lack of opportunity to address certain issues and present evidence, but the trial court orders show that a trial occurred, and he was given the opportunity to present witnesses and evidence but did not avail himself of that opportunity. Th e remaining issues entail factual issues involving credibility of witnesses. The trial court has wide discretion in evaluating the credibility of evidence and witnesses. See, e.g., Marsh v. Marsh, 419 So. 2d 629, 630 (Fla. 1982). Affirmed. GROSS, C.J., WARNER and CIKLIN, JJ., concur. * * * Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, Indian River County; George A. Shahood, Senior Judge; L.T. Case No. 09118 FR01. Antonio Joseph Martin, Sebastian, pro se. No appearance for appellee. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
