ALBERT MYLES, JR., APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
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 conviction for manslaughter is affirmed where circumstantial evidence showed the defendant was the only participant in a brawl carrying a knife and made lunging motions toward the victim before stabbing him.
A manslaughter conviction based on circumstantial evidence is sustained when the evidence is inconsistent with any reasonable hypothesis of innocence.
[1] When a conviction rests wholly on circumstantial evidence, the evidence must be inconsistent with any reasonable hypothesis of innocence to sustain the conviction, regard…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe defendant was one of six participants in a brawl. He was the only one seen with a knife, made lunging motions toward the victim while fighting, an…
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 Judgment Of Acquittal Standard cases and more on FLexlaw
THOMPSON, C.J.
The conviction for manslaughter is affirmed. In moving for a judgment of acquittal, a defendant admits the facts stated and evidence adduced, and also every conclusion favorable to the state that a jury might reasonably infer from the evidence. Hardwick v. State, 630 So. 2d 1212, 1213 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994). A special standard of review of the sufficiency of the evidence applies where a conviction is wholly based on circumstantial evidence.1 State v. Law, 559 So. 2d 187, 188 (Fla.1989). Where the only proof of guilt is circumstantial, no matter how strongly the evidence may suggest guilt, a conviction cannot be sustained unless the evidence is inconsistent with any reasonable hypothesis of innocence. Id. Here, the evidence that was inconsistent with the defendant’s theory of innocence was that he was the only one of the six participants in the brawl who was seen with a knife, he made lunging motions toward the victim while fighting with him, and he thereafter turned and stabbed another victim upon the latter’s approach.
AFFIRMED.
SHARP, W. and PLEUS, JJ., concur. . For purposes of appeal we assume this case is "wholly circumstantial.” See Omm v. State, 677 So. 2d 258 (Fla.1996). When the evidence is both direct and circumstantial, it is unnecessary to apply the special standard of review applicable to circumstantial evidence cases. Pagan v. State, 27 Fla. L. Weekly S299, - So. 2d -, 2002 WL 500315 (Fla. April 4, 2002),
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Baugher v. State, 843 So. 2d 970 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003)…PER CURIAM. AFFIRMED. See Myles v. State, 826 So. 2d 1102 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002); M.N. v. State, 821 So. 2d 1205 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002). SHARP, W., PETERSON and ORFINGER, JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- State v. Ronnie S. LAW, 559 So. 2d 187 (Fla. 1989)
- Orme v. State, 677 So. 2d 258 (Fla. 1996)
- Hardwick v. State, 630 So. 2d 1212 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994)