Skip to main content

Fields v. State

Citations

  • 46 Fla. 84

Syllabus

<p>1. Where a writ of error is sued out jointly by two defendants, but only one of said defendants assigns errors in this court, the proceedings. in error, so far as the defendant who fails to assign errors is concerned, will be treated as abandoned.</p> <p>2. It is within the sound judicial discretion of the trial court to control the detailed examination of witnesses, and, unless an abuse of this judicial discretion is shown to the appellate court, it will not disturb or reverse the ruling.</p> <p>3. A defendant in a criminal case'can not cross-examine a State witness about matters as to which he has not testified in his direct examination.</p> <p>4. A witness can not be cross-examined as to any fact which is collateral or irrelevant to the issue merely for the purpose of contradicting him by other evidence if he should deny it, thereby to discredit his testimony.</p> <p>5. For the purpose of discrediting a witness a wide range of cross-examination is permitted as a matter of right in regard to his motives, interest or animus as connected with the cause or the parties thereto, upon which matters he may'be contradicted by other evidence.</p> <p>6. Evidence 'of declarations or acts of a defendant, prior to the commission of a .crime by him, in his own favor or interest, falling within the class designated as “self-serving declarations and acts” and forming no part of the res gestae, is not admissible.</p> <p>7. Threats are admissible when they are part of the res gestae or when there is any doubt as to who began the difficulty, and it is not material in either of these cases that they should have been previously conveyed to the defendant.</p> <p>8. The physical or mental condition or appearance of a person, or his manner, habit or conduct, may be proved by the opinion of an ordinary witness, founded on observation.</p> <p>9. Where part of a conversation is given in evidence the defendant is entitled to have before the jury all that was said upon the subject upon the

Judges: Carter, Cockrell, Hocicer, Maxwell, Shackleford, Taylor

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

28 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

15 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.