Gamble v. State

Citations

• 44 Fla. 429

Syllabus

<p>CRIMINAL LAW—SEPARATION OF JURY—USE OF INTOXICANTS BY JURY.</p> <p>1. The mere separation of jurors, empanelled to try a capital case, from their fellows, without the attendance of an officer, although an irregularity, is not a sufficient cause for setting aside the verdict, if the court is satisfied that the prisoner has not sustained any injury from such separation. But where there has been an improper separation, during such trial, if the verdict is against the prisoner, he is entitled to the benefit of a presumption that the irregularity has been prejudicial to him, and the burden of proof is upon the prosecution to show to the entire satisfaction of the court that the prisoner has suffered no injury by reason of the separation (contrary dicta in State v. Madoiii, 12 Fla. 151, disapproved).</p> <p>2. If intoxicants be shown to have been used by the jury empanelled in a capital case, the presumption arises in favof of the convicted defendant that it resulted injuriously t« him, and the burden is on the State to show affirmatively to the entire satisfaction of the court, that its use was to such a limited and moderate extent as to completely and satisfactorily negative any harm to the defendant from its use by the jury or any member of it.</p>