Skip to main content

Leslie v. State

Citations

  • 35 Fla. 171

Syllabus

<p>Criminal law — entering buildings with intent to commit larceny-evidence OF GUILT FROM POSSESSION OF STOLEN GOODS— OWNERSHIP OF BUILDING ENTERED, HOW ALLEGED AND PROVED— CHANGE OF YENUE — ACCOUNTING FOR POSSESSION OF STOLEN GOODS, WHEN SHOULD ACQUIT.</p> <p>1. Under the provisions of sec. 2926 Rev. Stat., relative to change of venue in criminal cases the application for such change is addressed to the sound discretion -of the trial court, and a refusal of such an application will not be held as error by the appellate- • court, unless it appears from the facts presented that the court acted unfairly, and was guilty of a palpable abuse of sound discrelion; and where the change is sought upon the ground* of alleged prejudice against the accused on the part of the inhabitants of the county, this court can not declare that any such reversible abuse of discretion has been committed when, the facts urged as a necessity or reason for the change of venue, in the application therefor, have no other support than the bare affidavit of the accused applicant therefor.</p> <p>2. Whei-e the accused makes and flies an affidavit for continuancof a criminal cause against him, and subsequently, in his statement under oath on the trial of another criminal cause against him, makes assertions that conflict, or are materially inconsistent with the statements made in such affidavit for continuance, the latter is admissible in evidence to rebut the former</p> <p>3. Where a party who is found in possession of goods recently stolen directly gives a reasonable and credible account of how he came into such possession, or such an account as will raise a. reasonable doubt in the minds of the jury, then it becomes the-duty of the State to prove that such account is untrue, otherwise he should be acquitted; and the jiu-y are the sole judges-of the reasonableness and credibility of the account given.</p> <p>4. Where an indictment for the crime of entering a building, room- or office with intent to

How courts have described this case

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

  • statement made by the defendant in an affidavit submitted with motion for a continuance may be admitted as an admission against the defendant

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Taylor

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

8 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named Leslie v. State

48 other CourtListener records share this case 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.