Barton v. State
Citations
- 72 Fla. 408
- 73 So. 230
Syllabus
<p>1. Where an objection has been sustained to a question but subsequently during the trial the question was answered in effect by the witness, even if there -was error in the previous ruling, it was cured by the subsequent admission of the testi- ^ mony so excluded.</p> <p>2. Alleged errors in the admission or rejection of testimony which do not weaken the effect of the admitted evidence, and that do not reach the legality of the trial itself, will not be considered ground for reversal where the evidence leaves no room for doubt of the defendant’s guilt.</p> <p>3. Evidence of declarations or acts of a defendant, prior to the commission of a crime by him, in his own favor or interest, falling within the class designated as “self-serving declarations and acts” and forming no part of the res gestae, is not admissible.</p> <p>4. In lawfully defending himself a man may take life when as a reasonably prudent person he has reasonable ground to apprehend a design to commit a felony on him or to do him some great personal injury and that there is imminent danger of such design being accomplished, though as a matter of fact there was no actual danger; but if he wrongfully occasions or brings about' the necessity for his action, though as a prudent man he may have reasonable ground to apprehend a design to commit a felony on him or to do him some serious personal injury and that there is imminent danger of such design being accomplished, he can not lawfully kill and justify his conduct on the ground of self-defence.</p> <p>5. An objection to a portion of a charge stating an abstract proposition of law on the ground that it is misleading may be removed by another portion covering the ground so fully as to leave no room for a misdirection of the jury.</p> <p>6. In a prosecution for murder, an instruction asserting the proposition that, in order to justify a killing under a claim of self-defense, the slayer must have resorted to all reasonable means at his command, consistent wi
Judges: Shackleford
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
9 cases in this archive cite this case.
- State v. WolfSupreme Court of New Jersey· 1965-03-01· cited 71×
- Kersey v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1917-04-05· cited 32×
- State v. McCullySupreme Court of Louisiana· 1975-03-31· cited 18×
- Holland v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida· 1978-05-30· cited 13×
- Miller v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1918-12-05· cited 10×
- Herbert v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida· 1983-10-25· cited 4×
- Thomas v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida· 1969-03-25· cited 4×
- Burch v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida· 1978-07-11· cited 3×
- Dean v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1919-12-08· cited 2×
Cites
20 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Mathis v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1903-01-15· cited 81×
- Padgett v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1912-06-15· cited 44×
- Fields v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1903-06-15· cited 34×
- Wilson v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Florida· 1906-01-15· cited 32×
- Seaboard Air Line Railway v. ScarboroughSupreme Court of Florida· 1906-06-15· cited 30×
- Malsby v. GambleSupreme Court of Florida· 1911-01-15· cited 30×
- State v. PerkinsSupreme Court of Iowa· 1909-03-09· cited 28×
- Strickland v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia· 1902-04-01· cited 25×
- Padgitt v. MollSupreme Court of Missouri· 1900-12-18· cited 24×
- Owens v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1913-05-28· cited 23×
- Kennard v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1900-06-15· cited 19×
- McCall v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1908-01-15· cited 19×
- Jenkins v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1909-06-15· cited 18×
- State v. ManningSupreme Court of Vermont· 1903-02-25· cited 18×
- Investment Co. v. Trueman ex rel. StringfellowSupreme Court of Florida· 1912-01-15· cited 16×
- Driggers v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1896-06-15· cited 14×
- West v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1907-01-15· cited 11×
- Andrew v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1911-06-15· cited 7×
- Roberts v. Atlanta Consolidated St. Ry. Co.Supreme Court of Georgia· 1898-07-19· cited 7×
- Rhodes v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1913-06-09· cited 6×
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.