Long v. State
Citations
- 42 Fla. 509
Syllabus
<p>1. An indictment under section 2516 Revised Statutes need not allege that defendant severed from the realty, the property alleged to have been carried away; nor that the trespass was committed without the consent of the owner of the land where it is charged that it was willfully committed, and a description of the realty trespassed upon as “the land of E- F. S-, to-wit; a pinery located on the northeast quarter of the northwest quar- , ter of section two, township twenty-three, south, range twenty-nine, east,” is sufficiently definite.</p> <p>2. Pineapple plants growing in the soil are parcel of the realty within the meaning of section 2516 Revised Statutes and not farm products or fruit within the meaning of section 2517 Revised Statutes, as amended by Chapter 4531; act of 1897.</p> <p>3. Under Section 2893 Revised Statutes it is not error to refuse to quash an information upon the ground that it charges several distinct felonies in separate counts, unless such information is so vague, indistinct and indefinite as to mislead the accused, 'embarrass him in the preparation of his defence, or expose him after conviction or acquittal to substantial danger of a new prosecution for the same offence.</p> <p>4. Proof that the title to and management of a pinery alleged to have been trespassed upon were in the person alleged in the information, is sufficient to sustain the allegation as to ownership, even though the proof shows further that other persons were interested in the profits of the pinery.</p> <p>5. In order to convict one accused of wilfully committing a trespass upon realty by taking and carrying away therefrom pineapple plants parcel of the realty the proof must show that thg particular plants alleged to have been taken were in fact taken, but it is not necessary that the particular plants be produced before the jury, or if produced along with others of the same character and variety, that witnesses should be able to separate the identical plants taken from
Judges: Carter
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
15 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Alford v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1904-01-15· cited 36×
- Barber v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1906-06-15· cited 24×
- Johnson v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1906-01-15· cited 23×
- Bass v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1909-06-15· cited 18×
- West v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1908-01-15· cited 16×
- McDuffee v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1908-01-15· cited 13×
- Brown v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1903-06-15· cited 12×
- Mooneyham v. BowlesSupreme Court of Florida· 1916-11-03· cited 11×
- Washington v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1906-01-15· cited 10×
- Hudson v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida· 1980-03-25· cited 9×
- Bassett v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1902-01-15· cited 8×
- Ramsaran v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida· 1995-12-13· cited 7×
- Menefee v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1910-01-15· cited 6×
- Watson v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida· 1967-06-14· cited 6×
- Davis v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida· 1971-11-02· cited 5×
Cites
6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Eggart v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1898-06-15· cited 52×
- Leslie v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1895-01-15· cited 46×
- Wooten v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1888-06-15· cited 38×
- Green v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1880-01-15· cited 35×
- Reeves v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1892-01-15· cited 33×
- Bellamy v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1895-01-15· cited 12×
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.