JOHN LEE THOMAS
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 affirmed a conviction for second-degree murder, finding sufficient evidence for the corpus delicti, the identity of the deceased, and the degree of the offense, and that no reversible errors were made.
Yes, the evidence was sufficient to prove the corpus delicti and the identity of the deceased. Yes, there was ample evidence to support a conviction for murder in the second degree.
“The corpus delicti was clearly shown by evidence and circumstances as to the fatal stabbing, and of the death of the person so stabbed.”
Establishes the court's finding on the sufficiency of proof for the corpus delicti.
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 indicted for first-degree murder. The trial resulted in a conviction for second-degree murder. The defendant appealed, arguing insuf…
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 Corpus Delicti cases and more on FLexlaw
Upon an indictment for murder in the first degree by cutting and stabbing, the conviction was for murder in the second degree. On writ of error the contentions are that the corpus delicti and the identity of the deceased were not sufficiently proven, and that the evidence does not justify a verdict for a greater offense than manslaughter.
The corpus delicti was clearly shown by evidence and circumstances as to the fatal stabbing, and of the death of the person so stabbed. The identity of the person so cut as being the one who died from such wound is sufficiently established. There is ample evidence to support a conviction of murder in the second degree and no harmful or reversible errors are made to appear.
Affirmed.
Whitfield, C. J., and Brown and Davis, J. J., concur.
Ellis, P. J., and Terrell and Buford, J. J., concur in the opinion and judgment.
(concurring).-—While there is evidence upon which the verdict of guilt of second degree murder could have been based, the evidence as a whole would have made a verdict of manslaughter, more appropriate. However, I don’t think we would be justified in setting aside the verdict as rendered, and I therefore concur in an affirmance of the verdict and judgment.
Brown, J.
(concurring).-—While there is evidence upon which the verdict of guilt of second degree murder could have been based, the evidence as a whole would have made a verdict of manslaughter, more appropriate. However, I don’t think we would be justified in setting aside the verdict as rendered, and I therefore concur in an affirmance of the verdict and judgment.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
The Richter Jewelry Co., Inc. v. Schweinert, 125 Fla. 199 (Fla. 1935)…ot think Wicker v. Trust Co., 109 Fla. 411, 147 [*207] So. 586, or Mason v. Cunningham, 149 So. 331, 111 Fla. 200, are in conflict with what has been above said. Oh the the other hand, a recent Florida case quite closely in point is Hopkins v. Otto, 160 So. 203. In that case, the commission was paid to an employe in the lender’s office, which the chancellor in effect held was' in the nature of a bonus to the lender, which, with the interest reserved, rendered the loan usurious. The chancellor was affirmed.…1 / 2
-
Iola v. Brumick, 131 Fla. 46 (Fla. 1938)…is contended that defendant charged plaintiffs a rate of interest prohibited by law and cites Sections 6936-6937 C. G. L. as authority for the unlawful charge with Mason v. Cunningham, 111 Fla. 200, 149 Sou. Rep. 331; Hopkins v. Otto, 118 Fla. 865, 160 Sou. Rep. 203. Opposing counsel cites Wilson v. Connor-Knight Const. Co., 106 Fla. 6, 142 Sou. Rep. 606, to the effect that a person willfully violating the usury law must forfeit the entire interest charged or contracted for and must in addition double the amoun…
-
Pushee v. Johnson, 123 Fla. 305 (Fla. 1936)…le insurance, and the costs of closing the transaction even though such payments when added to the interest contracted for exceed the maximum interest allowed by law. Wilson v. Conner, 106 Fla. 6, 142 Sou. 606; Hopkins v. Otto, et al., 118 Fla. 865, 160 Sou. 203. So the only question left for our determination is whether or not in the transaction as above set forth the lender by accepting a part of the commission, which had theretofore been agreed to be paid to the broker without placing any further pecuni…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence