OTIS LEE, 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.
Otis Lee was convicted of rape and sentenced to life imprisonment. On appeal, he challenged the admission of his signed confession and the sufficiency of evidence, but the court affirmed his conviction, finding the confession was voluntarily given and substantial evidence supported the guilty verdict.
The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the confession was validly admitted because it was freely and voluntarily given after Lee was advised of his constitutional rights, and that substantial competent evidence in the record supported the jury's guilty verdict.
“From the evidence adduced the trial judge had the alternative of believing the testimony given by appellant, or believing the testimony of the County Judge of Bay County, the Sheriff of Bay County, the Chief of Detectives of the Panama City Police Department, the secretary who prepared the typewritten confession signed by appellant, the notary public who administered the oath to appellant when he signed the confession and the disinterested attesting witness.”
Establishes that the trial judge had clear basis to credit the state's witnesses regarding the confession's validity over the defendant's account.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceLee was indicted for rape. He signed a typewritten confession without reading it, claiming he did so out of fear despite not being abused or threatene…
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 Rape cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellant was indicted for the offense of rape. The trial jury rendered a verdict of guilty with a recommendation to mercy. From a judgment of guilty and sentence of life imprisonment, appellant has appealed.
It is first contended that the court •erred by admitting in evidence a purported •confession admittedly signed by appellant. Appellant concedes that he was not abused, threatened or mistreated in any way, but that he signed the confession without reading it because of fear. On appellant’s motion to suppress, the issue before the trial judge was whether the confession was freely and voluntarily given after appellant had been fully advised of his constitutional rights against self-incrimination.1 From the evidence adduced the trial judge had the alternative of believing the testimony given by appellant, or believing the testimony of the County Judge of Bay County, the Sheriff of Bay County, the Chief of Detectives of the Panama City Police Department, the secretary who prepared the typewritten confession signed by appellant, the notary public who administered the oath to appellant when he signed the confession and the disinterested attesting witness. The trial court chose to disbelieve the testimony of appellant and to believe the testimony of other witnesses which supported the validity of the confession. From the' facts appearing in this record the trial judge was justified in concluding that the confession was valid in all respects. Appellant has failed to demonstrate that the court erred in admitting the confession in evidence over his objection.
It is next contended that the evidence is not sufficient to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that appellant is guilty of the offense with which he is charged. The issue as framed by appellant’s point on appeal is one which may be decided only by the trial jury. Once this issue has been resolved against defendant by the rendition of a verdict of guilty, the sole authority of an appellate court is to review the record for the purpose of determining whether it contains sufficient competent substantial evidence which, if believed, will support the verdict.2 Although the evidence as revealed by this record is conflicting in many instances, the credibility of the witnesses and the weight to be given the evidence were questions for decision only by the jury. We find in the record competent substantial evidence pointing toward appellant’s guilt *353of the offense with which he was charged. Under these circumstances we have no authority to set aside the verdict. This is particularly true in view of the refusal of the able trial judge to grant appellant’s motion for a new trial based upon the insufficiency of the evidence to sustain the verdict.
We have considered the remaining points on appeal, but find them to be without substantial merit. The judgment is accordingly affirmed.
CARROLL, DONALD K., Chief Judge, and WIGGINTON and RAWLS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (17 total)
-
Crum v. State, 172 So. 2d 24 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965)…e is sufficient evidence to support a verdict or the conclusion of the trier of fact, an appellate court need only find substantial, competent evidence to support the verdict. See: Zalla v. State, Fla.1952, 61 So. 2d 649; Lee v. State, Fla.App.1963, 153 So. 2d 351; Sharon v. State, Fla.App. 1963, 156 So. 2d 677. The verdict or judgment of guilt having arrived in this court with a presumption of correctness (see: Taylor v. State, 139 Fla. 542, 190 So. 691, 124 A.L.R. 835; Inman v. State, 139 Fla. 789, 191 So.…
-
Hiram Cazes Parnell v. State, 218 So. 2d 535 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969)…the fur coat and the color of the mink collar were decided in favor of the State. Thus, where every element of the crime is present in the record, this court should not interfere with the conclusions of the trier of fact. Lee v. State, Fla.App.1963, 153 So. 2d 351; Eizenman v. State, Fla.App. 1961, 132 So. 2d 763. See: Lockett v. State, Fla.App.1966, 188 So. 2d 12. Under point three, the defendant makes the constitutional attack on his conviction, basically upon the following grounds: (1) [*540] The delayed…
-
LEE v. State, 173 So. 2d 520 (Fla. 1st DCA 1965)…n of the trial court in denying the motion to vacate and set aside the judgment of conviction rendered against appellant is free from error, and it is accordingly affirmed. CARROLL, DONALD K., and RAWLS, JJ., concur. . Lee v. State, (Fla.App.1963) 153 So. 2d 351. . Lee v. Florida, 377 U.S. 999, 84 S.Ct 1924, 12 L.Ed.2d 1049. . Washington v. State, 95 Fla. 298, 113 So. 470. . State ex rel. Landis v. Lewis, 118 Fla. 910, 160 So. 485. . Baker v. State, 150 Fla. 446, 451, 7 So. 2d 792. . Bailey v. Henslee,…
Previewing 3 of 17 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Frazier v. State, 107 So. 2d 16 (Fla. 1958)
- Zalla v. State, 61 So.2d 649 (Fla. 1952)