Revels v. State

Citations

• 68 Fla. 74
• 66 So. 422

Syllabus

<p>An instruction that requires the explanation given by a party found in possession of goods recently stolen, as to how he acquired such possession, to be satisfactory, as well as reasonable, before such explanation shall shift the burden on the State of proving the falsity thereof, is erroneous. The correct rule is, that where a party is found in possession of goods recently stolen and 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, who are the sole judges of its reasonableness, probability and credibility, then it becomes the duty of the State to prove that.such account is false, otherwise there should be an acquittal.</p>