Wilson v. State
Citations
- 47 Fla. 118
Syllabus
<p>1. The error, if any was committed by the court, in refusing to strike testimony was cured by subsequently striking it and directing the jury to disregard it.</p> <p>3. The admission of testimony that could not possibly harm the accused under the facts admitted will not constitute reversible error.</p> <p>3. The action of the court in overruling an objection to a pertinent question to a State witness, will not be reversed especially when the answer thereby elicited tended to help the accused.</p> <p>4. On a trial for the embezzlement of a horse hired to drive in one county, it having been proven that the horse was driven into another county and left with a liveryman from whom the accused, a stranger, obtained money, the State may ask the defendant, who volunteers as a witness — “When you got that money from Mr. Adams and left that horse and buggy there with him, he being an entire stranger to you, did you tell him that this horse and buggy did not belong to you?” On the direct examination the witness had testified he had not told Adams the horse belonged to him (witness).</p> <p>5. Questions directed to the defendant on cross-examination as to matters within his own breast, that offered opportunity for explanation of suspicious circumstances that are not answered nor pressed by the State, do not constitute ground for reversal.</p> <p>6. Where in the argument of counsel to the jury no fact, not in evidence is assumed, this court will not scrutinize with nicety the logical force of arguments assigned as ground for reversal, nor will the court below be reversed for refusal to interfere with the argument because it is illogical or not based on deductions reasonably inferable from the facts.</p> <p>7. Instructions amounting to an affirmative charge for the accused are properly refused when the evidence supports a verdict of guilty. As to whether they may ever be proper in criminal cases, see McCray v. State, 45 Fla. 80, 34 South. Rep. 5.</p> <p>8. On a trial for embez
Judges: Cockrell
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
13 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Hopkins v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1906-06-15· cited 38×
- Maloy v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1906-06-15· cited 27×
- Tyson v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1924-04-12· cited 26×
- Young v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1923-03-15· cited 25×
- Synes v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1919-07-29· cited 20×
- Graham v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1916-12-19· cited 16×
- Leaptrot v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1906-01-15· cited 13×
- Ryan v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1910-06-15· cited 12×
- Smith v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1917-07-02· cited 10×
- Hatcher v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1917-10-19· cited 8×
- Rhodes v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1913-06-09· cited 6×
- Neal v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1908-01-15· cited 5×
- Wells v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1918-02-05· cited 3×
Cites
8 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Sylvester v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1903-06-15· cited 36×
- Mitchell v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1901-06-15· cited 25×
- Mills v. JoinerSupreme Court of Florida· 1884-01-15· cited 21×
- State v. BaumhagerSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1881-08-03· cited 20×
- Kennard v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1900-06-15· cited 19×
- Finlayson v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1903-06-15· cited 13×
- Mims v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1900-01-15· cited 6×
- Strong v. Lake Weir Chautauqua & Lyceum Ass'nSupreme Court of Florida· 1889-06-15· cited 3×
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.