MONTY MYERS, 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 manslaughter, finding sufficient evidence to support the jury's verdict that the defendant's culpable negligence in operating an automobile while intoxicated caused the death.
Yes, the court held that there was ample substantial evidence in the record to support the allegations of the indictment and the jury's verdict.
“In this case the plaintiff in error was convicted of manslaughter.”
Establishes the underlying conviction being appealed.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe plaintiff in error was convicted of manslaughter for culpable negligence in operating an automobile. The indictment was drawn under Florida statut…
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 Culpable Negligence cases and more on FLexlaw
Buford, J.
In this case the plaintiff in error was convicted of manslaughter. The indictment appears to have been drawn under the provisions of Section 5039, Rev. Gen. Stats., 7141 Comp. Gen. Laws. The offense was alleged to have been committed by the culpable negligence of the accused in the driving and operating of an automobile.
The assignments of error are based upon the alleged insufficiency of the evidence and that the verdict is contrary to the law and the evidence.
There is ample substantial evidence in the record to support the allegations of the indictment and there is also ample substantial evidence in the record to show that the accused was at the time of the commission of the alleged offense driving an automobile on a public highway while intoxicated.
The judgment should be affirmed under authority of the opinion in the case of Cannon v. State, 91 Fla. 214, 107 So. R. 360; Hobbs v. State, 83 Fla. 480, 91 So. R. 555; Shaw v. State, 88 Fla. 320, 102 So. R. 550; Whiteman v. State, 97 Fla. 988, 122 So. R. 567.
It is so ordered.
Affirmed.
Whitfield, P. J., and Strum, J., concur. Terrell, C. J., and Ellis and Brown, J. J., concur in the opinion and judgment.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
McKinlay v. State, 141 So. 882 (Fla. 1932)…in the cases of Hopkins vs. State, 52 Fla. 39, 42 Sou. 52; Gee vs. State, 61 Fla. 22, 54 Sou. 458; Bell vs. State, 65 Fla. 505, 62 Sou. 654; Seymour vs. State, 66 Fla. 133, 63 Sou. 7, and Kerdsey vs. State, 73 Fla. 832, 71 Sou. 983. Myers vs. State, 99 Fla. 872, 128 So. 11. It is so ordered. Affirmed. Buford, C.J. and Whitfield, Ellis and Terrell, J.J., concur. Brown and Davis, J. J., dissent.…
-
Ates v. State, 141 Fla. 502 (Fla. 1939)…nformation, and there is also ample substantial evidence in the record to show that plaintiff in error was under the influence of intoxicating liquor to such an extent as to deprive him of full possession of his normal faculties. See Myers v. State, 99 Fla. 872, 128 So. 11; Patterson v. State, 128 Fla. 539, 175 So. 730; Whitman v. State, 97 Fla. 988, 122 So. 567; Cannon v. State, 91 Fla. 214, 107 So. 360; Hobbs v. State, 83 Fla. 480, 91 So. 535; Shaw v. State, 88 Fla. 320, 102 So. 550; Graives v. State, 12…
Authorities Cited
- Cannon v. State, 107 So. 360 (Fla. 1926)
- Whitman v. State, 97 Fla. 988 (Fla. 1929)
- Job Shaw v. State, 88 Fla. 320 (Fla. 1924)
- Hobbs v. State, 83 Fla. 480 (Fla. 1922)