WILL TATUM, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, DEFENDANT IN ERROR
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a conviction for robbery while armed, holding that conflicting evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict.
Yes, the appellate court found that the evidence presented by the State was legally and factually sufficient to support the jury's verdict.
“We have carefully examined the evidence, and while it is conflicting, yet that on behalf of the State, we think, was sufficient both in law and fact to support the verdict found, and the same seems to have been given credence to by the jury in preference to that on behalf of the defendant that was in conflict with it.”
This quote explains the court's reasoning for affirming the verdict, emphasizing that conflicting evidence does not preclude a valid jury finding if the State's evidence is sufficient.
The plaintiff in error was convicted of robbery while armed with a dangerous weapon in the Criminal Court of Record of Escambia County. The evidence p…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Conflicting Evidence cases and more on FLexlaw
Taylor, J.
The plaintiff in error was informed against, tried, convicted and sentenced in the Criminal Court of Record of Escambia county for the crime of robbery while armed with a dangerous weapon. He seeks reversal of the judgment here on writ of error. Several errors are assigned, but all of them have been abandoned here except those based upon the contention that the verdict is contrary to the evidence and is not supported by it, and because such verdict is contrary to law.
We have carefully examined the evidence, and while it is conflicting, yet that on behalf of the State, we think, was sufficient both in law and fact to support the verdict found, and the same seems to have been given credence to by the jury in preference to that on behalf of the defendant that was in conflict with it. The judgment of the court below is, therefore, hereby affirmed at the cost of the county of Escambia, the insolvency of the defendant having been established in the court below to the satisfaction of the judge.
Hockbr and Cockrell, JJ. concur. Whitfield, C. J., and Carter and Shackleford concur in the opinion.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Buchanan v. State, 95 Fla. 301 (Fla. 1928)…made by bullets which entered “here and came out there” and such other indefinite descriptions, confirmed the deduction. This is true because the burden is upon the plaintiff in error to make the error, if any, clearly to appear. See Tatum v. State, 49 Fla. 67, 38 South. Rep. 601; Waldo v. State, 58 Fla. 133, 50 South. Rep. 487; Houston v. State, 50 Fla. 90, 39 South. Rep. 468; McRae v. State, 62 Fla. 74, 57 South. Rep. 348. These circumstances justify the conclusion at which the jury arrived that the as…
-
McClellan v. State, 66 Fla. 215 (Fla. 1913)…be disturbed by the appellate court. McDonald v. State 56 Fla. 74, 47 South. Rep. 485; Posey v. State, 58 Fla. 92, 50 South. Rep. 530; Teal v. State, 43 Fla. 580, 31 South. Rep. 282; Strobhar v. State, 55 Fla. 167, 47 South. Rep. 4; Tatum v. State, 49 Fla. 67, 38 South. Rep. 601., There is substantial competent testimony that the defendant below assaulted and with a knife cut the [*217] prosecuting witness in a number of places on his person, under such circumstances that if death had resulted therefrom…
-
Chancey v. State, 54 Fla. 20 (Fla. 1907)…We find nothing which would warrant or justify us in setting the verdict aside, therefore the judgment must be affirmed, and it is so ordered, at the cost of the county of Lee. See Smith v. State, 49 Fla. 33, 38 South. Rep. 599, and Tatum v. State, 49 Fla. 67, 38 South. Rep. 601. Cockrell and Whitfield, JJ., concur. Taylor, Hocicer and Parkhill, JJ., concur in the opinion.…