Roberts v. State

Citations

• 72 Fla. 132
• 72 So. 649

Syllabus

<p>1. When the voir dire examination discloses that an impartial jury was readily selected from a distant portion of the county, there is no error in refusing a change of venue.</p> <p>2. The trial of a homicide one month after its commission did not under the circumstances show undue haste.</p> <p>3. Upon proof of a conspiracy to commit murder the court mav instruct that it is immaterial which one of the conspirators fired the fatal shot, and that a doubt as to that identity would not destroy the State’s case.</p> <p>4. The court should not instruct upon the credibility of a particular witness, not an accomplice.</p> <p>5. While it is the better rule to instruct, if requested by the defendant, that “no presumption of guilt arises from the failure of the defendant to take the stand and testify in his own behalf,” yet other charges sufficiently cured the omission.</p> <p>6. The evidence supports the verdict.</p>