CEDRIC GARTH BRUTON, 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 appellate court affirmed a conviction based on the testimony of a single eyewitness, holding that such identification is sufficient to support a conviction under Florida law.
Yes, the positive identification by one witness is sufficient to support a conviction.
“The judgment of conviction arrived in this court with a presumption of correctness.”
Establishes the standard of review for 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 appellant was convicted in a non-jury trial. One witness positively identified the appellant as the perpetrator, while other witnesses were uncert…
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 Presumption Of Correctness Of Judgment cases and more on FLexlaw
By this appeal the defendant seeks review of an adverse judgment of conviction in a non-jury cause, with sentence accordingly.
One witness positively identified the appellant as the perpetrator of the crime; others were not certain that he was the one and they were in conflict as to his apparel. One other witness did indicate that the perpetrator was of the same general size as the appellant.
The judgment of conviction arrived in this court with a presumption of correctness. Crum v. State, Fla.App.1965, 172 So.2d 24; Nelson v. State, Fla.App. 1968, 208 So.2d 506; Gilroy v. State, Fla.App.1968, 212 So.2d 823. Our duty is to examine the record to see if there is sub*670stantial competent evidence to support the finding's of the trier of the facts. There being such in this record, we affirm. The Supreme Court of Florida has specifically held that positive identification by one witness is sufficient to support a conviction. State v. Sebastian, Fla.1965, 171 So.2d 893.
Therefore, the judgment of conviction and sentence here under review be and the same is hereby affirmed.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
I.R. and I.R. v. State, 385 So. 2d 686 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)…re the brother struck the fatal bow.2 The testimony of a single witness, even if uncorroborated and contradicted by other State witnesses, is sufficient to sustain a conviction. Singleton v. State, 315 So. 2d 506 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975); Bruton v. State, 220 So. 2d 669 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969). Affirmed. . Had the court in Majors held that the evidence was insufficient to prove Majors’ guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, Majors would have been entitled to the entry of a judgment of acquittal. . While the instant appeal…
-
Ivory Simmons v. State, 236 So. 2d 147 (Fla. 3d DCA 1970)…ble doubt that the defendant is the perpetrator of the crimes for which he was convicted. The judgment of conviction arrives in this court with a presumption of correctness. Crum v. State, Fla.App.1965, 172 So. 2d 24; Bruton v. State, Fla.App.1969, 220 So. 2d 669. It is our duty to examine the record to see if there is substantial competent evidence to support the findings of the trier of the facts. [*148] We have carefully considered appellant’s point on appeal, in the light of the record, briefs and argume…
-
Rolle v. State, 711 So. 2d 1388 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Bruton v. State, 220 So. 2d 669 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969) (positive identification by one witness sufficient to support a conviction); Yant v. State, 192 So. 2d 297 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966); Vitiello v. State, 169 So. 2d 339 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964).…
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
- Crum v. State, 172 So. 2d 24 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965)
- State v. Sebastian, 171 So. 2d 893 (Fla. 1965)
- Nelson v. State, 208 So. 2d 506 (Fla. 4th DCA 1968)
- Gilroy v. State, 212 So. 2d 823 (Fla. 2d DCA 1968)