Yarbrough v. State

Citations

• 79 Fla. 256
• 83 So. 873

Syllabus

<p>1. It is well settled that a defendant is not entitled as of right to an instruction to the jury to return a verd.iet of acquittal.</p> <p>2. A verdict of acquittal upon a trial on an indictment charging the larceny of an automobile is not a bar to a subsequent indictm'eht aüd cohvifctidn bf p&jtify com&itted by thé defendant as a witness in his own behalf upon a trial on the former indictment wherein he is alleged to have sworn falsely in substance and to the effect that he had not seen and did not have in his possession such automobile.</p> <p>3. A defendant cannot after seiiurihg an acquittal by perjury, successfully plead such Acquittal in bar of a bfdsfecUtibn for the perjury so committed.</p> <p>4. Materiality of the alleged; false‘testimony is an essential element of the crime of perjury which in order to sustain a conviction, must be alleged and proved.</p> <p>5. To convict of the crime of perjury the offense must be proved by the oaths of two witnesses or by the oath of one witness and other independent and corroborating circumstances which are deemed of equal weight with another witness. Such is the rule now well established on authorit. And the.element of the offense, which must be so proved, is the falsity of the material matter sworn to.</p>