Skip to main content

Gray v. State

Citations

  • 42 Fla. 174

Syllabus

<p>1. A statement in a motion for a new trial is not self-supporting in view of a ruling of the court denying it.</p> <p>2. Chapter 4400, Laws of 1895, prohibits prosecuting officers from .commenting before the court or jury upon the failure of an accused to testiy as a witness in his own behalf, and it is the duty of trial courts to see that such impropriety is not committed</p> <p>3-, After the state closed its testimony, the accused examined several witnesses in his defence, though fie did not testify in his own behalf; the prosecuting officer in his argument to the jury stated that the evidence as it stood before them unexplained and uncontradicted, although it did not point positively to the •defendant was sufficient to warrant a verdict of guilty: Held, Tó be a permissible comment on the evidence as it existed, avoiding as it did, any reference to the failure of the defendant himself to explain or contradict what had been introduced.</p> <p>4. Near the body of a deceased found in a road a human track was seen leading away with certain peculiarities; a witness for the State testified that about one month before the killing he saw tracks made by the accused and they were the same as that found near the body: Held, not to be objectionable on the ground of remoteness.</p> <p>5. To show flight after a homicide it is competent to prove bj witnesses living so near the accused and accustomed to see him so often when at home that a failure to see him there would tend to show absence,' that he was not seen there after the killing.</p> <p>6. Testimony having a .tendency to prove a material circumstance in the case is material though its bearing may be slight.</p> <p>7. Aft.er the retirement of the jury under the charge of the court they returned into court and requested to know whether under the law they must find a verdict of murder in the first degree or acquit; or whether they could find the accused guilty of some lesser offence, and the court reread to them portions

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • after jury's retirement and subsequent recall, defense counsel's objection to word in charge was corrected by explanation given by court

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Mabry

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

2 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.