Robinson v. State

Citations

• 24 Fla. 358

Syllabus

<p>1. Plaintiff in error’s counsel requested the court to instruct the jury:' “If you believe from the evidence that there is a question of the ownership of this hog, no matter how slight it may be between Joseph Rowe and Peggy Mitchell, you must find for the defendants,” was properly refused, it was too broad.</p> <p>2. A charge that if the jury believe from the evidence that the defendants killed the hog in question, honestly believing at the time that it belonged to Rowe, they committed no offence against the laws of this State, would have been correct.</p> <p>3. When there is conflicting evidence it is the duty of the jury, if possible, to reconcile the conflict, and after doing so, if the defendant is convicted, and there is evidence sustaining the verdict,' and there is no question as to the credibility of the witnesses, and there is nothing to show that the jury were influenced by any improper motive, this court will not set the verdict aside.</p> <p>4. The court will not reverse the finding of the jury upon a question’ of fact, unless the verdict is so clearly and manifestly against the weight of evidence as to suggest the presumption that it was-produced by influences other than a proper consideration of the testimony.</p>