JAMES LLOYD BYRD, 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.
The court held that the appellant failed to demonstrate an abuse of judicial discretion in denying his motion for severance and that any comments by the judge on the evidence did not constitute harmful error.
The appellant was indicted for rape, found guilty by a jury, and sentenced to life imprisonment. This case is a companion to another case with substan…
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 Abuse Of Discretion cases and more on FLexlaw
The appellant, James Lloyd Byrd, and six other defendants were indicted for the crime of rape. After trial by jury, Byrd was found guilty and so adjudicated, and, a majority of the panel having recommended him to the mercy of the court, he was sentenced to life imprisonment.
This is a companion case to Woodside v. State, Fla.App.1968, 206 So.2d 426, and the facts therein reported are substantially the same.
Appellant presents two points for reversal. Appellant’s first contention is that the trial court erred in denying his motion for severance. As was stated in Reddick v. State, Fla.App.1966, 190 So.2d 340,
“An application for severance is addressed to the trial court’s sound discretion and the order thereon will not be reversed except for palpable abuse of judicial discretion.”
On appeal, the burden of showing the abuse of judicial discretion is cast upon the appel*431lant. Jackman v. State, Fla.App.1962, 140 So.2d 627. We are of the opinion that appellant has failed to carry that burden here.
The second point raised by the appellant concerns certain statements, made during the course of the trial by the trial judge, which statements, it is contended, were comments on the evidence, hence error. Assuming for the purpose of the discussion that these statements were comments on the evidence, appellant has nonetheless failed to show that these comments constituted harmful error. This being so, the contention is meritless. See § 54.23, Fla.Stat., F.S.A., and Tanner v. State, Fla.App.1967, 197 So.2d 842.
No prejudicial error has been made to appear. Accordingly, for the reasons above expressed we affirm.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Talavera, 243 So. 2d 595 (Fla. 1971)…in the discretion of a trial judge to grant a severance and it is incumbent upon an appellant, when urging error on this ground, to demonstrate an abuse of this discretion. Jackman v. State, Fla.App.1962, 140 So. 2d 627; Byrd v. State, Fla.App.1968, 206 So. 2d 430. This record fails to reveal any abuse of discretion by the trial judge at the time of the pre-trial motion for severance, which motion was not renewed during the progress of the trial.” [*597] This Court recognizes the fundamental nature of the rig…
-
Flewellyn v. State, 308 So. 2d 46 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975)…the following authorities: Rowe v. State, 128 Fla. 394, 174 So. 820; Worthington v. State, Fla.App. 1966, 183 So. 2d 728; Lister v. State, Fla.App.1969, 226 So. 2d 238; Woodside v. State, Fla. App. 1968, 206 So. 2d 426; Byrd v. State, Fla.App. 1968, 206 So. 2d 430; Grech v. State, Fla.App.1971, 243 So. 2d 216; United States v. Cooper, 5th Cir. 1973, 472 F. 2d 64. No point on appeal has been made on the disparity between the sentence which would have been given on the negotiated plea and that as actually give…
-
Saunders v. State, 217 So. 2d 134 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Woodside v. State, Fla.App.1968, 206 So. 2d 426; Byrd v. State, Fla.App.1968, 206 So. 2d 430; and, Parks v. State, Fla.App.1978, 206 So. 2d 431. Nelson v. State, Fla.App.1968, 208 So. 2d 506; and, Murray v. State, Fla.App.1966, 191 So. 2d 292.…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Jackman v. State, 140 So. 2d 627 (Fla. 3d DCA 1962)
- Reddick v. State, 190 So. 2d 340 (Fla. 2d DCA 1966)
- Woodside v. State, 206 So. 2d 426 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968)
- Tanner v. State, 197 So. 2d 842 (Fla. 1st DCA 1967)