Skip to main content

Collier v. State

Citations

  • 55 Fla. 7

Syllabus

<p>1. When a building has been entered and property stolen therefrom, and soon thereafter the property is found in the possession of the person charged with entering the building with intent to steal, such possession unexplained may be sufficient to warrant a conviction of the crime of entering the building with intent to steal.</p> <p>2. The guilt of the accused does not follow as a presumption of law from the unexplained possession of the property recently stolen, but the presumption of guilt in such a case is one that the jury may infer as a matter of fact, of which they are the sole judges, to be considered in connection with all the other circumstances in each particular case.</p> <p>3. When a party who is charged with breaking and entering a building with intent to steal is found in possession of goods recently stolen and directly gives a reasonable and credible account of how he came into such possession, or such an account as will raise a reasonable doubt in the minds of the jury, then it becomes the duty of the State to prove that such account is untrue, otherwise he should be acquitted. The account given must be, not only reasonable, but it must be credible or sufficiently so to raise a reasonable doubt in the minds of the jury, who are the judges of its reasonableness and probability as well as of its credibility. The account given may be reasonable and highly plausible, and yet the jury may not believe a word of it to be true. In the latter case they would have the right to convict upon proof that the building was broken and entered and the evidence furnished by the possession of the stolen goods, even though the State had not put in any proof directly to prove the falsity of the account given.</p> <p>4. The finding upon a person of property of such peculiar nature and condition that it can be easily and positively identified which was shortly before stolen from a building by breaking and entering may be by the jury taken as evidence of guilt of the brea

Judges: Whitfield

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

9 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

4 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.