Copeland v. State

Citations

• 41 Fla. 320

Syllabus

<p>1. It is futile to object in the appellate court that the trial court did not instruct the jury upon all the grades of homicide to which the evidence may be applicable when no request was made to instruct on the lesser grades than that of which the accused was convicted.</p> <p>2. Since the act of 189s, Chapter 4400, a defendant in a criminal prosecution has no right to make a sworn statement, to the jury without the right of cross-examination as other witnesses, by the State.</p> <p>3. A medical witness was examined by the State as to the character of wounds inflicted upon the deceased. After stating on cross-examination that he had known the deceased for five years; he was asked by the defendant what was the deceased’s character' in the community in which she lived: Held, That the question was properly excluded because the testimony sought to be elicited thereby was not in cross of anything brought out in the direct evidence; that no foundation had been laid at the time for the introduction of evidence as to the character of the deceased, nor was the particular phase of character indicated.</p> <p>4. Testimony tending to impeach the moral character of the deceased, or tending to show general bad character, when such evidence does not come within the rule announced in this State to explain or tend to explain the conduct of the deceased at the time of killing when the plea is self-defence, should be excluded.</p> <p>5. When a person of sound mind criminally acts upon the impulse of heat or passion or feelings produced by motives of anger, hatred or revenge, he is responsible for his acts.</p> <p>6. Charges of the court to the jury should be based upon the testimony in the case, andswhen a charge requested is not authorized by the testimony it is not error to refuse it.</p>