Mendenhall v. State
Citations
- 71 Fla. 552
- 72 So. 202
Syllabus
<p>1. A general averment as to “certain mortal injuries and mortal sickness, a further description whereof is to the jurors unknown” will support an indictment for murder.</p> <p>2. The denial of a motion by one charged with murder for a bill of particulars as to the cause or manner of death, is not error, it subsequently appearing that the accused was better informed on the subject than any State witness.</p> <p>3. Pleas in abatement are bad that seek to attack the title to office of the judge presiding, while recognizing the validity of the office for which he is commissioned.</p> <p>4. The discretion of the Circuit Court in ordering the talesmen summoned from the county at large, instead of drawing them from the jury box was not abused.</p> <p>5. It is permissible to exhibit a colored photograph of the deceased to a witness who knew her by sight though not by name, for the purpose of identification, and the trial judge certifying that it was not exhibited to the jury, error cannot be predicated upon its assumed exhibition to the jury.</p> <p>6. A party who desires to keep from the jury instructions asked by him that are refused, should separate them and make a timely request to the court that they be not given to the jury.</p> <p>7. An admonitory charge to the jury that it would be a violation of their sworn duty to convict, unless the evidence convinces them beyond a reasonable doubt, and equally a violation to acquit when the evidence is conclusive, is not rendered objectionable by using the word “when,” instead of “if,” the connection here indicating they are synonymous.</p> <p>8. In connection with other charges no possible hasnn resulted from the refusal to distinguish between a premeditated design to take human life and the intention to do so.</p> <p>9. It is proper to add to an instruction that the defendant’s owrf testimony may raise a reasonable doubt, the qualification that with his testimony, all the evidence should be considered.</p> <p>10. Where the
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- “The word ‘when’ has a conditional concept in it, and as here used means ‘if.’ ”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Cockrell, Ellis, Shackleford, Taylor, Whitfield
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
3 cases in this archive cite this case.
Cites
6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- State ex rel. Turner v. HockerSupreme Court of Florida· 1895-06-15· cited 52×
- Sherman v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1880-06-15· cited 21×
- Stewart v. MillsSupreme Court of Florida· 1881-01-15· cited 11×
- Houston v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1905-06-15· cited 9×
- Ayers v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1911-06-15· cited 9×
- People v. CummingsCalifornia Supreme Court· 1880-07-01· cited 5×
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.