Charles v. State

Citations

• 58 Fla. 17

Syllabus

<p>Criminal Law — Assigning Charges En Masse — Evidence Involving Other Criminal Transactions — Suspending Counsel During Trial — Order of Proofs.</p> <p>1. Where a single general assignment of error is made to embrace refusals to give two or more instructions that assert distinct propositions of law, an appellate court will go no further into the consideration of such an assignment after ascertaining that any one of the several instructions thus aggregated was correctly refused. Such an assignment of error must prevail as an entirety or fail in toto. ,</p> <p>2. In the trial of a defendant on the charge of aiding and abetting another in defrauding a bank, evidence tending to establish other and a continued series of fraudulent transactions of a similar character between the same parties is admissible.</p> <p>3. It is improper for trial courts as a penalty for contempt of court by counsel pending a trial to deprive a defendant on trial for crime of the services of such counsel pending such trial by suspending such counsel. The proper practice in .such a case is to defer the application of a penalty upon the -offending counsel until after the close of the trial, and then to punish the contempt by fine or imprisonment, or by both such fine and imprisonment.</p> <p>4. The order and method, for the submission of testimony to a jury is within the sound discretion of the presiding judge, and a new trial will not be granted because further evidence was permitted to be introduced after both sides had closed their evidence, and after the arguments of counsel had commenced, unless it be shown that the defendant was prejudiced thereby in some other way than by its mere irregularity.</p>