Jackson v. State

Citations

• 49 Fla. 3

Syllabus

<p>1. Where the plaintiffs in error were convicted of breaking and entering á building with intent to commit a misdemeanor, i. e., with intent to take, steal and carry away a lot of bacon, and it appears from the evidence that the building was broken and entered; that bacon was stolen, which was found shortly afterwards in the possession of the. plaintiffs in error, it was a question for the jury to determine whether the plaintiffs in error gave a reasonable and credible explanation of how they came into the- possession of the recently stolen property, and if the evidence as given in the record is sufficient to support the verdict and affords no ground for ,the opinion that the jury were governed by improper influences in arriving at their verdict under assignments of error questioning the sufficiency of the evidence the judgment of the court below will be sustained.</p> <p>2. When there -are assignments of error in a criminal case which.are not argued, but merely insisted upon in the brief of plaintiffs in error, this court is not required to do more than read the record carefully in connection with such assignments of -error, and if it discovers no glaring error prejudicial to the plaintiffs in error, under such-assignments, the judgment will not be reversed because of such assigned errors.</p>