Skip to main content

Robertson v. State

Citations

  • 64 Fla. 437

Syllabus

<p>Criminal Law — Change of Venue — Continuance—Public Trial — Charging on Interest of Defendant as Affecting His Credibility as a Witness — Reiterating Charges Al- . ready Given.</p> <p>1. An application for a change of venue is addressed to the sound judicial discretion of the court, and its ruling, refusing the change, will not be. disturbed unless it appear from the facts presented that the court acted unfairly and abused a sound discretion; and such ruling will not be disturbed where the application is supported by the uncorroborated ■ affidavit of the accused and where there is nothing to show that he was prevented by hostile public sentiment from getting corroborative evidence.</p> <p>2. An affidavit filed in support of a motion for the continuance of a cause is fatally defective when it fails to state, among other facts, “that the application is not made for delay only.”</p> <p>3. The words public, as used in the constitution guaranteeing to all persons accused of crime a public trial, is there used in opposition to secret. The constitutional requirement is «,fairly observed, if without partiality or favoritism, a reasonable portion of the public is suffered to attend, notwithstanding that those persons whose presence would be of no service to the accused, and who would only be drawn thither by a prurient curiosity are excluded altogether. The exclusion by the court of all persons other than those interested in the case, where, from the character of the charge and nature of the evidence, public morality would be injuriously affected, does not violate the constitutional right to a public trial.</p> <p>4. The following charge given by the court to the jury held not be erroneous: “The court charges you that under the law the defendant may become a witness and testify in his own behalf, and in consideration of his testimony and the weight and credibility which should be given to the same, it is proper for you to take into consideration the interest which the def

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • those necessary for conduct of the trial plus those interested in the case

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Cockrell, Hooker, Shackleford, Taylor, Whitfield

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

24 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

9 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

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.