Duncan v. State
Citations
- 29 Fla. 439
Syllabus
<p>ARSON OP RAILWAY BRIDGE — ALLEGATION OP OWNERSHIP BY CORPORATION — EVIDENCE—DEMURRER TO EVIDENCE — VENUE.</p> <p>1. An indictment charging the wilful and malicious burning of a bridge owned .by a corporation is sufficient in its description of the owner when it gives the corporate name of the owner, and states in substance that the company named is a corporation doing business in this State. In such cases it is not necessary to allege in the indictment that such corporation was “ duly organized or incorporated under the laws of any State or territory.”</p> <p>2. In the trial under an indictment charging the wilful and malicious burning of a bridge forming part of the roadbed of a railway company, named in the indictment as the owner of such bridge, the corporate existence of such alleged owner is sufficiently proven if it be shown that it was a corporation in existence de facto, and, de facto in the exercise of corporate functions and franchises, whether it was a corporation de jure or not.</p> <p>3. In criminal cases when the accused has put himself upon the country by his plea of not guilty, he has made his election to be tried by jury, and upon his subsequent demurrer to the evidence, it is the right of the State to hold him to his election and to have the facts determined by a jury. In such cases it is discretionary with the State Attorney whether he will consent to take the facts from the jury by joining in such demurrer. The court in such case can not compel the State’s counsel to join in such demurrer.</p> <p>4. In criminal trials it is entirely discretionary with the court whether it will entertain a demurrer to the evidence, even though counsel for the prisoner and the State should both consent to it. In such case, whether the court’s refusal to entertain such demurrer can be made the subject of review by this court, Qucere 9</p> <p>5. Where the evidence does not expressly locate the crime as having been committed in the county charged in the indictment,
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- same; testimony that offense occurred two and one-half miles west of Lake City
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Taylor
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
17 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Holland v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1897-01-15· cited 58×
- Lowman v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1920-06-10· cited 40×
- Di Bona v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida· 1960-06-10· cited 30×
- Wilkinson v. Pensacola & Atlantic RailroadSupreme Court of Florida· 1895-01-15· cited 22×
- Bailey v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1918-07-09· cited 13×
- D.S.S. v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 2003-06-12· cited 12×
- McCune v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1900-01-15· cited 9×
- Leslie v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1895-01-15· cited 8×
- Drayton v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1919-08-01· cited 8×
- Butler v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1895-01-15· cited 7×
- McClendon v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida· 1960-01-19· cited 6×
- Skinner Manufacturing Co. v. WrightSupreme Court of Florida· 1906-01-15· cited 5×
- Pennick v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida· 1984-08-07· cited 4×
- Lockett v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida· 1966-06-07· cited 1×
- Parks v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida· 1968-09-10· cited 1×
- DSS v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 2003-06-12
- Leo v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida· 1977-05-20
Cites
7 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Andrews v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1885-06-15· cited 31×
- Bryan v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1883-01-15· cited 15×
- Higgs v. SheheeSupreme Court of Florida· 1852-01-15· cited 14×
- People v. JacksonNew York Supreme Court· 1850-06-04· cited 11×
- Johnson v. StateIndiana Supreme Court· 1879-05-15· cited 11×
- M'Laughlin v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1834-02-21· cited 6×
- Commonwealth v. St. ClairGeneral Court of Virginia· 1844-12-15· cited 6×
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.