Johnson v. State

Citations

• 55 Fla. 41

Syllabus

<p>1. Where one of the assignments of error is based upon the over-ruling of the motion for a new trial, an appellate court will consider only such grounds of the motion as are argued.</p> <p>2. In passing upon a single instruction or charge it should be considered in connection with all the other instructions and charges bearing on the same subject, and if, when thus considered, the law appears to have been fairly presented to the jury, an assignment based upon the giving of such instruction or charge must fail.</p> <p>3. In a prosecution for murder, if the defendant conceived it necessary or advisable to have the word “aggressor” defined, or if he desired to have the jury, more fully instructed upon any point, he should have prepared and presented to the trial court the specific instructions he wished given. Having failed to do this, an appellate court will not entertain his complaint of such omission by the trial court.</p> <p>4. Clerical errors in a charge or instruction given by the trial court in a criminal prosecution furnish no ground for reversal of the judgment therein, when it' is not apparent that the jury could have been misled or confused thereby.</p> <p>5. Where the evidence in terms does not make out a case of murder in the third degree, but is sufficient to sustain a higher degree of murder, the verdict for murder in the third, degree must be sustained as against a motion for a new trial upon the ground that the evidence is insufficient to support the verdict. (Taylor, J., dissents to 3th headnote.)</p>