Supreme Court of Florida· 5/6/1913

Daughtry v. State

Citations

65 Fla. 415
62 So. 345

Syllabus

<p>1. An extra judicial confession is admissible upon proof that the brand of an animal had been changed under circumstances indicating a fradulent intent.</p> <p>2. Upon a trial for altering the brand of an animal, it is error to charge the conviction may fellow proof of altering either mark or brand.</p>

Judges: Cockrell, Hocker, Shackleford, Taylor, Whitfield

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

3 cases in this archive cite this case.

Ruiz v. State
District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1980-09-23· cited 19×
Drysdale v. State
District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1976-01-16· cited 9×
Pickett v. State
District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1967-09-14· cited 3×

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.