CEASER BROWN, 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 appellate court affirmed a conviction for manslaughter, finding sufficient evidence that the appellant caused the victim's death through culpable negligence in operating a motor vehicle.
Yes, the evidence was sufficient to sustain the conviction for manslaughter.
“The question presented on appeal is whether the evidence was sufficient to sustain the conviction.”
This quote frames the central legal issue on appeal.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe appellant was charged with causing a death through culpable negligence in operating a motor vehicle. He was tried without a jury and convicted of …
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
The Appellant, Ceaser Brown, was informed against and tried in the Criminal Court of Record in Dade County without a jury. He was convicted of manslaughter under § 782.07, Fla.Stat., F.S.A., and sentenced to be confined for a period of three years. The question presented on appeal is whether the evidence was sufficient to sustain the conviction. Appellant was charged with having caused the death of one Olive Kodner through culpable negligence in the operation of a motor vehicle. Having heard oral argument, considered the briefs and examined the record on appeal, we conclude the trial judge was eminently correct in his denials of the defendant’s motions for directed verdict and for new trial, and that the evidence produced was sufficient to meet the requirements of proof and establish the guilt of the accused. See Penton v. State, Fla.App.1959, 114 So.2d 381; Fulton v. State, Fla.1959, 108 So.2d 473.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Barnett First Nat'l Bank OF Jacksonville v. Custom Fin. Co., 210 So. 2d 291 (Fla. 1st DCA 1968)…ect in ordering Barnett to remit the collections to. the entruster until his security interest was satisfied. I, therefore, Dissent. . Sections 673.09 and 673.10, Florida Statutes, F.S.A. . Universal C.I.T. Credit Corp. v. Thursbay Chevrolet Co., 136 So. 2d 15 (Fla.App.1st, 1961). .Section 319.23, Florida Statutes, F.S.A. . Trumbull Chevrolet Sales Co. v. Seawright, 134 So. 2d 829 (Fla.App.1st, 1961). . Id.…
-
H.B. London & Co. v. Wiles, 695 So. 2d 876 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997)…ng it has a perfected security interest in Tier’s collateral, and of demonstrating that the funds in the Central Bank account are identifiable cash proceeds of the sale of that collateral. Cf. Universal C.I.T. Credit Corp. v. Thursbay Chevrolet Co., 136 So. 2d 15, 18 (Fla. 1st DCA 1961) (under Uniform Trust Receipts Act, creditor must identify and trace proceeds). Reversed and remanded for further proceedings. SCHOONOVER, A.C.J., and FRANK, J., concur.…
-
In re dissolution of Nash Miami Motors, Inc. v. Nash Miami Motors, Inc., 169 So. 2d 491 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964)…t., F.S.A., the Florida Codification of the Uniform Trust Receipts Law, the cases which have dealt with same (English v. Universal C.I.T. Credit Corp., 278 F. 2d 750 (C.A. 5th Cir.); Universal C.I.T. Credit Corp. v. Thursbay Chevrolet, Fla.App.1961, 136 So. 2d 15) and cases dealing with the same provision in other states (In Re Crosstown Motors, Inc., 272 F. 2d 224 (C.A. 7th Cir.); Commercial Credit Corp. v. Hoff, 1962, 228 Md. 533, 180 A. 2d 830). Chapter 673.10, Fla.Stat., F.S.A., provides in part: “Entru…
Authorities Cited
- Fulton v. State, 108 So. 2d 473 (Fla. 1959)
- Penton v. State, 114 So. 2d 381 (Fla. 2d DCA 1959)