Martin v. State

Citations

• 68 Fla. 18
• 66 So. 139

Syllabus

<p>1. In a prosecution on an indictment for murder in the first degree, it is not error to admit over a general objection that it is “immaterial and irrelevant” testimony as to a previous difficulty shortly before the homicide, which evidence contains some statements of the circumstances of the previous difficulty that tended to show a premeditated design to kill the . deceased as charged; and a verdict of murder in the second degree does not render the ruling erroneous.</p> <p>2. Evidence of an experiment should be received with caution, and should be admitted only when it is obvious to the court from the nature of the experiments that the jury will be enlightened rather than confused.</p> <p>3. If in the .discretion of the trial court proffered evidence of an experiment is rejected the appellate court will not review the ruling unless an abuse of discretion appears.</p> <p>4. Where fundamental rights aré not invaded and it is not ' clearly shown that the trial court abused sound discretion in admitting testimony that, may fairly tend to test the credibility of a witness, or it does not appear that the purpose or effect of the testimony is merely to degrade tbe witness or to injure liim before the jury, the action of the trial court will not be disturbed.</p>