J. O. LUKE, 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 assault with intent to commit manslaughter, holding that any errors in evidentiary rulings were harmless and did not affect the substantial rights of the defendant, given the ample evidence supporting the verdict.
The court held that even if errors were committed in the evidentiary rulings, they were not material or harmful. The court also found ample evidence to sustain the verdict and conviction.
“The judgment should not be reversed or a new trial granted in any case, civil or criminal, for errors in rulings upon the admission or rejection of evidence, or for errors in giving or refusing charges, or for errors in any other matter of procedure or practice, unless it shall appear to the Court from a consideration of the entire cause that such errors injuriously affect the substantial rights of the complaining party.”
This quote establishes the standard for appellate review of procedural and evidentiary errors, emphasizing the need for substantial harm.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe defendant was tried on an indictment for assault with intent to commit murder and was convicted of the lesser offense of assault with intent to co…
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 Assault With Intent To Commit Manslaughter cases and more on FLexlaw
Per Curiam.
At a trial on an indictment charging an assault with intent to commit murder, the defendant was convicted of an assault with intent to commit manslaughter. On writ of error six assignments of error predicated upon rulings on the admissibility to testimony are argued.
Even if error was committed in any of such rulings they were not material or harmful in view of the evidence and of the record of the proceedings at the trial.
There is ample evidence to sustain the verdict and the judgment of the conviction is a proper one in this record.
The judgment should not be reversed or a new trial granted in any case, civil or criminal, for errors in rulings upon the admission or rejection of evidence, or for errors in giving or refusing charges, or for errors in any other matter of procedure or practice, unless it shall appear to the Court from a consideration of the entire cause that such errors injuriously affect the substantial rights of the complaining party. Nor should a judgment lie reversed or a new trial granted on the ground that the verdict is not sustained by the evidence, unless it appears that there was no substantial evidence to support the finding, or that upon the whole evidence the verdict is clearly wrong, or that the jury were not governed by the evidence in making their finding. Johnson v. State, 80 Fla. 61, 85 South. Rep. 155; Breen v. State, 84 Fla. 518, 94 South. Rep. 383.
Affirmed.
Taylor, C. J., and Whitfield, Ellis, Browne and Terrell, J. J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Johnson v. State, 80 Fla. 61 (Fla. 1920)
- Breen v. State, 84 Fla. 518 (Fla. 1922)