GEORGE E. ANTONE AND JASPER ANTONE, PLAINTIFFS 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 reviewed a larceny conviction, finding the evidence insufficient for one defendant but sufficient for the other. The court affirmed the conviction for one defendant while reversing it for the other, as the judgment was severable.
The evidence was legally insufficient to sustain the conviction as to George E. Antone, but sufficient to sustain the conviction as to Jasper Antone.
“The evidence is regarded as being legally insufficient to sustain the verdict as to George E. Antone, but it is sufficient to sustain the conviction as to Jasper Antone.”
This quote explains the court's finding regarding the sufficiency of evidence for each defendant.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceGeorge E. Antone and Jasper Antone were charged with larceny of a calf and receiving stolen property. A jury found them guilty of larceny under the fi…
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 Receiving Stolen Property cases and more on FLexlaw
Whitfield, J.
The information in one count charges G. E. Antone, Jasper Antone and Dave Goldsby with the larceny of one calf, the property of G. J. Morgan; in the second count with the larceny of one yearling calf of the property of Ira Howell; and in the third count with receiving stolen property, etc. G. E. Antone and Jasper Antone were found guilty under the first and second counts, and Dave Goldsby was found not guilty by the verdict. As a result of this verdict all were acquitted under the third count.
The judgment of the court imposed imprisonment on George E. Antone and Jasper Antone under the first count, and on Jasper Antone alone under the second count. Both took a writ of error. The points of procedure properly presented for determination have been considered and the conclusion as to them is that if errors they were harmless under the circumstances of this case.
The evidence is regarded as being legally insufficient to sustain the verdict as to George E. Antone, but it is sufficient to sustain the conviction as to Jasper Antone. As the judgment is severable it is reversed as to George E. Antone and affirmed as to Jasper Antone.
It is so ordered.
Browne, O. J., and Taylor, Ellis and West, J. J,, concur.