MARTIN BOSWORTH
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 statutory rape, holding that the evidence presented was sufficient to support the jury's verdict and that the venue was properly established. The court deferred to the jury's role in weighing evidence and assessing witness credibility.
Yes, the evidence was sufficient to establish guilt and prove venue. The court found substantial evidence in the record to sustain the jury's verdict and the trial judge's approval of that verdict.
“The sole questions involved are whether or not the evidence is sufficient to establish the guilt of the accused and the venue of the offense.”
This quote states the central legal issues presented to the appellate court.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe plaintiff in error was convicted of statutory rape, specifically having sexual intercourse with an unmarried female under eighteen years of age an…
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 Venue cases and more on FLexlaw
This case involves the conviction of the plaintiff in error of the statutory offense of having sexual intercourse with an unmarried female under eighteen years of age and of previous chaste character.
*794The sole questions involved are whether or not the evidence is sufficient to establish the guilt of the accused and the venue of the offense. We find substantial evidence in the record to sustain the verdict and judgment. The weight of the evidence and the credibility of the witnesses were matters for the jury to determine. The jury convicted the defendant and the learned and experienced trial judge gave such conviction the stamp of his approval by denying motion for new trial. We. shall not disturb the judgment. It is affirmed.
So ordered.
Terrell, Brown, Buford and Chapman, J. J., concur.