JOHN L. DARBY, 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 evidence was sufficient to sustain the conviction, the use of an interpreter was not prejudicial, and the sentence was not excessive.
John L. Darby was convicted of robbery based on the testimony of a convicted accomplice and other evidence. He appealed the conviction and sentence.…
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 Statutory Sentencing Limits cases and more on FLexlaw
John L. Darby was informed against, tried before a jury, and convicted of the crime of robbery. On this appeal he urges reversal, claiming: (1) the evidence is insufficient to sustain a conviction because the only evidence that he was at the scene of the crime is the testimony of a convicted accomplice; (2) the court erred in using an interpreter whose work was accurate but confusing; (3) the sentence is excessive. We find no prejudicial error and affirm the judgment and sentence.
While the testimony of an accomplice should be closely scrutinized and received with great caution, it is competent and may be sufficient to convict an accused. The credibility of a witness lies exclusively within the province of the jury. Here, since the jury believed the testimony of the accomplice, we hold that that testimony together with the other evidence adduced at trial was sufficient to sustain the conviction. See Jackman v. State, Fla.App.1962, 140 So.2d 627.
The use of an interpreter is a matter within the discretion of the trial judge. Watson v. State, Fla.1966, 190 So.2d 161. The record fails to show an objection by the appellant to the employment of an interpreter and also fails to reveal any prejudice to the appellant resulting from such employment.
The point directed to the sentence is without merit. An appellate court of this state will not disturb a sentence which is within the limit set by statute. Infante v. State, Fla.App.1967, 197 So.2d 542. The sentence of the appellant, thirty-five years in the state penitentiary, is within the limit set by § 813.011, Fla.Stat., F.S.A.1
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Nusspickel v. State, 966 So. 2d 441 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007)…zing that “this Court and the United States Supreme Court have embraced the notion that so long as the sentence imposed is within the maximum limit set by the legislature, an appellate court is without power to review the sentence”); Darby v. State, 216 So. 2d 29, 30 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968) (“An appellate court of this state will not disturb a sentence which is within the limit set by statute.”). In Fraley v. State, 426 So. 2d 983, 985 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983), the Third District stated the following: Most assuredly,…
-
GIL v. State, 266 So. 2d 43 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972)…nterpreter were inaccurate and prejudicial to the defendant; The selection of a suitable person as an interpreter is largely a matter within the discretion of the trial court. Watson v. State, Fla.1966, 190 So. 2d 161; Darby v. State, Fla.App.1968, 216 So. 2d 29. The particular person, whose services were employed by the court in the instant case, is an excellent interpreter and had been used by the court on many previous occasions. No error was established, no witness called and no affidavits were filed by…
-
J.M. v. State, 677 So. 2d 890 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996)…d by the trial court. The exercise of discretion will not be disturbed if the sentence imposed does not exceed the bounds established by statute.” Infante v. State, 197 So. 2d 542, 544 (Fla. 3d DCA 1967) (citations omitted); see also Darby v. State, 216 So. 2d 29, 30 (Fla.1968); Davis v. State, 123 So. 2d 703, 707 (Fla.1960); Walker v. State, 44 So. 2d 814, 815 (Fla.1950); Brown v. State, 152 Fla. 853, 13 So. 2d 458, 461 (1943); Blackman v. State, 265 So. 2d 734, 736 (Fla. 3d DCA), cert. denied, 269 So. 2d 3…
Previewing 3 of 7 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)
- Watson v. State, 190 So. 2d 161 (Fla. 1966)
- Infante v. State, 197 So. 2d 542 (Fla. 3d DCA 1967)