Skip to main content

Blackwell v. State

Citations

  • 76 Fla. 124
  • 79 So. 731

Syllabus

<p>1. Where it is alleged in an affidavit of the defendant in a criminal case in suport of a motion for a change of venue that the defendant is odious to the people of the County, that the prejudice against him is very great, and that a fund had been subscribed to by the citizens of the County and collected by a Deputy Sheriff to employ additional counsel to assist in the .prosecution of the defendant, and where two of the attorneys f<5r the defence swear that on account of the vast and powerful Influence of the sheriff that the people of the County were greatly prejudiced against the defendants, and that the Sheriff had proclaimed his belief in the guilt of the prisoners and thereby caused the people generally to hate and despise the defendants and believe them guilty, and these allegations are not traversed by the State, it was reversible error to refuse to grant a change of venue.</p> <p>2. Where an application for a change of venue is based on the prejudice of the Judge against the defendants, no discretion is vested in the Judge to hear and determine the question of whether or not he is prejudiced.</p> <p>3. Where it is alleged in an affidavit in support of a motion for change of venue on the grounds of the prejudice of the Judge against the defendant, that the Judge “yielded to public clamor,” and called a special term of the Court a short time before the regular term of the Court would convene, and that in doing this he acted “solely at the behest of public sentiment,” and that he did this without any other and further reason than that the “people of the County demanded speedy justice,” it was reversible error to refuse the motion.</p> <p>4. Kemarks made by counsel in the presence of the Jury which would naturally tend to influence their minds to the prejudice of the defendants, when called to the attention of the Court, should be stricken from the record, and the jury admonished that they should give no consideration to such remarks, and the refusal of the C

How courts have described this case

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

  • prosecutorial comments regarding appellate review approved by trial judge held reversible error

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Browne, Ennispj, Simmons, Távlor, West, Whitfield

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

25 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

16 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.