Skip to main content

Adams v. State

Citations

  • 56 Fla. 1

Syllabus

<p>i. The rule prevailing here in granting continuances in criminal cases is the same as the one that obtains in civil cases, except that in criminal cases the grounds for the motion should be scanned more closely than in civil cases, on account of the superior temptation to delay.</p> <p>2. An application for a continuance of a cause' is addressed to the sound discretion of the court, and the action of the trial court thereon will not be reversed unless there has been a palpable abuse of that discretion to the injury of the aocused. s</p> <p>3. All facts necessary to show a clear abuse of the discretion of the court in ruling upon an application for the continuance of a cause to the injury of the defendant must be presented, and, whenever the record is either silent or uncertain on any point material to establish an abuse of such discretion, the presumptions are all in favor of the correctness of the ruling.</p> <p>4. An affidavit filed in support of a motion for the continuance of a cause is fatally defective when it fails to state,, (i) that the applicant expects to procure said testimony at the next term, or (2) that the absent witness resides in the county where the suit, is pending, or if out of the county good cause is not shown for taking his deposition, or (3) that the application is not made for delay only, or (4) that the absent witness has been duly served with a subpoena, or a satisfactory reason assigned for ithe omission.</p> <p>5. Where there is evidence from which all the elements of the crime of which the defendant stands convicted may be legally inferred and it does not appear that the jury were not governed 'by .the evidence adduced at the trial, the appellate court will not disturb the verdict.</p> <p>6. The defendant having been convicted of murder in the second degree stood acquitted of the crime of murder in the first degree charged against him. Thereafter he could only to put upon trial for the crime of-murder in the second degree; and, this

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • holding \that the trial court's pretrial decision not to impose a death penalty did not transform first-degree murder into a noncapital crime\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Cockrell, Hocker, Parkhill, Shackleford, Taylor, Whitfield

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

14 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

13 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.