ROBERT CLAUDE STUCKEY, APPELLANT,
v.
THE 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.
Robert Stuckey appealed his robbery conviction, challenging the sufficiency of evidence. The Florida District Court of Appeal affirmed the conviction, finding the victim's eyewitness identification sufficiently supported the jury verdict despite Stuckey's alibi defense and minor discrepancies in the victim's description.
The conviction was affirmed. The jury properly rejected the alibi testimony, and the minor discrepancy regarding the gold teeth did not undermine the overall strength of Wall's detailed and positive eyewitness identification, which was sufficient to support the verdict.
“the jury's verdict and the court's adjudication of guilt based thereon were amply supported by the evidence”
The appellate court's conclusion that sufficient evidence supported the conviction
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMrs. Anna Wall was awakened in her parents' home by a black man displaying a gun who robbed the house. The robber was not disguised. Wall gave police …
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 Jury'S Province cases and more on FLexlaw
This appeal by the defendant below from a conviction for robbery challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the judgment. Having considered the record and briefs we conclude that the jury’s verdict and the court’s adjudication of guilt based thereon were amply supported by the evidence.
The robbery occurred in the afternoon, in a residence. Mrs. Anna Wall, who was then visiting in her parents’ home, was awakened from a nap to see a negro man standing six .to eight feet from her, displaying a gun. He enjoined her to silence and proceeded to take money from a purse or purses in the house. He was not wearing a disguise. After he departed, Mrs. Wall called the police and gave them a description of the man. The following day she identified him from photographs supplied by the police. After the defendant was apprehended, she identified him in a lineup. At the trial she made a further positive identification of the defendant.
In support of his contention as to insufficiency of the evidence, the defendant relies on testimony of certain witnesses produced by him who placed him elsewhere at the time, in an attempt to establish an alibi. The appellant also relies on the fact that whereas he had gold in his teeth, Mrs. Wall in her testimony stated the contrary.
The alibi testimony was rejected by the jury, as was their province, in view of the testimony identifying the defendant as the participant in the robbery. Flowers v. State, 152 Fla. 649, 12 So.2d 772; Kennedy v. State, 153 Fla. 863, 16 So.2d 45.
It was established at the trial that the defendant had gold in his teeth, which was readily visible when displayed for observation. But the record does not show how prominent it was or to what extent it may have been visible to one in Mrs. Wall’s position when she observed the man at the time of the robbery. That conflict, or discrepancy in her testimony was minor in view of her otherwise detailed and positive identification. ' The issue of identification was one for determination by the jury (Harris v. State, 129 Fla. 733, 177 So. 187; Martin v. State, 100 Fla. 16, 129 So. 112), and its overall effect was not destroyed by such minor conflict. Yant v. State, Fla. App.1966, 192 So.2d 297.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Town of Boynton v. State, 100 Fla. 16 (Fla. 1930)
- Flowers v. State, 152 Fla. 649 (Fla. 1943)
- Augustus Harris v. State, 129 Fla. 733 (Fla. 1937)
- Fulwood v. State, 152 Fla. 693 (Fla. 1943)
- Harley Kennedy v. State, 153 Fla. 863 (Fla. 1943)
- Yant v. State, 192 So. 2d 297 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966)