Skip to main content

Leaptrot v. State

Citations

  • 51 Fla. 57

Syllabus

<p>1. It is not a sufficient ground of exception to the ruling of a trial court, sustaining a challenge of the State to a juror, that a defendant was thereby, after having exhausted his challenges, compelled to accept another juror, to whom 4¡ he objected because of this ruling of the court, when it does not appear that the juror that was forced upon him was not in every way competent, qualified and unbiased, and when no injury is shown.</p> <p>2. The discretion of a trial judge in rejecting a juror will not be disturbed unless it is shown that there was an abuse of such discretion prejudicial to the defendant.</p> <p>3. On the trial of a party for perjury alleged ,to have been committed by him in the Circuit Court, in answer to questions put to him by the judge as a juror, on his voir dire examination, the questions asked him and the answers given by him, may properly be proven by the State Attorney, Clerk of the Circuit Court or by any other competent witness who heard the same.</p> <p>4. In the trial of a charge of perjury the mental condition of the defendant at the time the alleged false oath was taken, and his physical condition as bearing on the mental, including his powers of memory, are proper subjects of investigation; as perjury is committed only where there is intent to testify falsely. This investigation may involve the question of sanity, but not necessarily so, and any competent witness who knows the defendant, may give his opinion as to his failing condition of mind and memory at the time of his committing the alleged perjury.</p> <p>5. A defendant in a criminal case is not entitled as of right to an instruction to the jury to render a verdict of not guilty.</p> <p>6. In a prosecution for perjury, where the evidence justifies it, a defendant is entitled to an instruction, if he properly prepares and requests it, requiring the jury to take into consideration his mental condition at the time of committing the alleged perjury, whether normal or failing,

Judges: Cockrell, Hocker, Parkhtll, Shackleford, Taylor, Whitfield

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

12 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

12 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.