Skip to main content

Hall v. State

Citations

  • 78 Fla. 420
  • 83 So. 513

Syllabus

<p>1. If in the examination of jurors upon their voir dire in a criminal case it appears that a certain juror is unqualified, but the Court refuses to sustain the defendant’s challenge for cause, who afterwards' excuses the juror by a peremptory challenge, the court’s ruling will not be regarded as harmful error.</p> <p>2. The question of the qualification of a venireman is a judicial one and is addressed to the court’s discretion; any alleged error in the Court’s ruling upon a juror’s qualification therefore should be made affirmatively to appear, and that it was harmful to the defendant, to constitute reversible error.</p> <p>3. The admission in evidence of a photograph of a house at which a homicide was Committed and a photograph of the interior of the room in which it wias committed, which photograph showed white spots indicating the places upon the flo'or where the persons fell who were shot, is not erroneous where such photographs do not themselves constitute a picture version or interpretation of the character of the actual occurrence.</p> <p>4 It is not error for the Court in the trial of a criminal cause to admit in evidence the defendant’s voluntary and noncommittal account or statement to the sheriff of the transaction upon which the charge against the defendant rests.</p> <p>5. Where in a prosecution for murder the sanity of the defendant at the time of the alleged crime is a material issue, it is proper to receive in evidence the opinions of non-expert witnesses ,as to the defendant’s mental condition when such opinions are based upon facts, circumstances, transactions in the defendant’s life observed and noted by the witnesses who should detail such facts, circumstances and transactions in their testimony.</p> <p>6. Where non-expert witnesses are offered in behalf of defendant as to his mental condition ¡and such witnesses can recall no facts in the defendant’s life tending t’o show. insanity, but are permitted to express their opinions concerning his

How courts have described this case

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

  • It is improper segregate ... any fact from all the material facts sought to be established

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Browne, Ellis, Taylor, West, Whitfield

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

30 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

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.