E. BERT RIDDLE
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
Affirmed.
THOMAS, C. J., SEBRING, BARNS and HOBSON, JJ., concur.
TERRELL and CHAPMAN, JJ., dissent.
ADAMS, J., not participating.
dissenting:
I think the evidence in this case is legally insufficient to support the conviction. Considered in sum, I think it is more consistent with a frame-up on the defendant than it is with his guilt. It is far short of showing a “lewd” attempt to “fondle” the prosecutrix, and, while on trial for a felony with a sex aspect, it is about to condemn defendant to infamy and dishonor I am convinced that it would not be sufficient to condemn him for chicken stealing, a trial for which would be governed by the same rules of evidence.
Having received such a reaction from the record impels me to dissent. I am authorized to say that Mr. Justice CHAPMAN agrees to this conclusion.
CHAPMAN, J., concurs.
TERRELL, J.,
dissenting:
I think the evidence in this case is legally insufficient to support the conviction. Considered in sum, I think it is more consistent with a frame-up on the defendant than it is with his guilt. It is far short of showing a “lewd” attempt to “fondle” the prosecutrix, and, while on trial for a felony with a sex aspect, it is about to condemn defendant to infamy and dishonor I am convinced that it would not be sufficient to condemn him for chicken stealing, a trial for which would be governed by the same rules of evidence.
Having received such a reaction from the record impels me to dissent. I am authorized to say that Mr. Justice CHAPMAN agrees to this conclusion.
CHAPMAN, J., concurs.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (15 total)
-
Hieber v. Hieber, 151 So. 2d 646 (Fla. 3d DCA 1963)…antial evidence to support findings, the findings will not be set aside unless appellant clearly demonstrates that substantial error was committed by the chancellor, or that the findings were erroneous under the evidence. Ball v. Ball, 160 Fla. 601, 36 So. 2d 172. After a careful examination of the record, we conclude that the chancellor’s decree denying the plaintiff’s divorce should not be disturbed, no substantial error having been made to appear. See Travis v. Travis, 81 Fla. 309, 87 So. 762. The appel…
-
Klaus Zurstrassen v. Stonier, 786 So. 2d 65 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001)…f fact. Id. at 58-59. If a party knows of a fraud, does not reject it, and takes any material act inconsistent with an intent to avoid it or delays in asserting any remedial rights, then that party ratifies the fraud. See Ball v. Ball, 160 Fla. 601, 36 So. 2d 172, 177 (1948). However, in the instant case, there is no evidence that Klaus knew of the forgery so as to reject it. Even though he signed the paper acknowledging that title was in Rolfs name and authorizing Rolf to sell the property, Rolf led him to…
-
Young v. Young, 97 So. 2d 470 (Fla. 1957)…chancery, independently of statute and as an incident to chancery jurisdiction, has the power to make and enter appropriate orders allowing counsel fees to the wife. Prine v. Prine, 36 Fla. 676, 18 So. 781, 34 L.R.A. 87; Ball v. Ball, 160 Fla. 601, 36 So. 2d 172; Courtney v. Courtney, 108 Fla. 276, 146 So. 229. The appellee relies on Therry v. Therry, 117 Fla. 453, 158 So. 120. This case appears to us to be clearly distinguishable from the matter before us. In the Therry case the wife sued for divorce on s…
Previewing 3 of 15 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence