GEORGE W. WOODWARD, ET AL.,
v.
STATE
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 reversed a conviction for incest, finding the evidence insufficient to support the guilty verdict and ordering a new trial to serve the interests of justice.
The evidence was insufficient to sustain the conviction for incest. The interests of justice would be better served by granting a new trial.
“in view of the uncertainties appearing in the evidence, and the strong doubt which the evidence raises as to the defendants' guilt of the revolting crime with which they were charged and found guilty, that the ends of justice will be subserved by the granting of a new trial.”
This quote explains the Court's reasoning for reversing the conviction and granting a new trial.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceGeorge W. Woodward and Juanita Woodward were convicted of incest with Juanita, who is George's twelve-year-old daughter. The State's proof of the crim…
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 Incest cases and more on FLexlaw
Plaintiff in error, George D. Woodward,, was convicted of the crime of incest with his twelve-year-old daughter, who is the plaintiff in error, Juanita Woodward. The brief of the Attorney General concedes the essential weakness of the State’s proof and a careful examination of the evidence by the members of this Court has convinced us that in view of the uncertainties appearing in the evidence, and the strong doubt which the evidence raises as to the defendants’ guilt of the revolting crime with which they were charged and found guilty, that the ends of justice will be subserved by the granting of a new trial. See Courson v. State, decided at the present term. Hammock v. State, 99 Fla. 1119, 128 Sou. Rep. 267; Fuller v. State, 92 Fla. 873, 110 Sou. Rep. 528; Council v. State, 111 Fla. 173, 149 Sou. Rep. 13; Calloway v. State, decided at the present term (opinion filed Nov. 10, 1933).
Reversed and a new trial awarded.
Whitfield, Ellis and Terrell, J. J., concur.
Buford, J., dissents.
Brown, J., absent on account of illness.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Delbert Lee Tibbs v. State, 397 So. 2d 1120 (Fla. 1981)…of the opinion seems to indicate that reversal was based on the state’s failure to place the defendants at the scene of the crime or to prove that they fired the fatal shots. McNeil v. State, 104 Fla. 360, 139 So. 791 (1932), and Woodward v. State, 113 Fla. 301, 151 So. 509 (1933), are similar to Williams. In McNeil this Court reversed because “the evidence of identity of the accused as being the guilty party [was] not satisfactory to the appellate court .... ” 104 Fla. at 361, 139 So. at 792. The state, i…
-
Howell v. State, 121 Fla. 327 (Fla. 1935)…he time of the alleged unlawful carnal intercourse shows that the evidence is of such unsatisfactory character that a majority of the Court are of the opinion the ends of justice will be best subserved by the award of a new trial. Woodward v. State, 113 Fla. 301, 151 Sou. Rep. 509, and authorities cited therein. Reversed for a new trial. Whitfield, C. J., and Terrell and Davis, J. J., concur. Brown and Buford, J. J., dissent.…
-
State v. Delbert Lee Tibbs, 370 So. 2d 386 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979)…enalty (life imprisonment) and ordered a new trial where although there was direct evidence identifying the defendant as the perpetrator of the crime, this evidence was “not satisfactory to the appellate court.” 139 So. at 792. In Woodward v. State, 113 Fla. 301, 151 So. 509 (1933), the court, pointing to the weakness of the evidence, reversed the conviction and remanded for a new trial by another jury in order to serve the “ends of justice.” In Skiff v. State, 107 Fla. 90, 144 So. 323 (1932), the supreme…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Fuller v. State, 92 Fla. 873 (Fla. 1926)
- Joseph Council v. State, 111 Fla. 173 (Fla. 1933)
- Goff v. State, 111 Fla. 82 (Fla. 1933)
- Hammock v. State, 99 Fla. 1119 (Fla. 1930)