MRS. WILLIE SMITH, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, DEFENDANT IN ERROR
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 reversed a first-degree murder conviction, holding that the circumstantial evidence presented was insufficient to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and was consistent with innocence.
No, the circumstantial evidence presented was insufficient to support the conviction. The evidence was not conclusive, did not lead to a moral certainty of guilt, and was consistent with innocence.
“When circumstantial evidence is relied on for conviction the circumstances, when taken together, must be of a conclusive nature and tendency, leading on the whole to a reasonable and moral certainty that the accused and no one else committed the offense charged.”
Establishes the legal standard for circumstantial evidence in criminal convictions.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMrs. Willie Smith and her brother, Ray Wynn, were convicted of first-degree murder of Mrs. Smith's husband. The evidence against Mrs. Smith was entire…
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 First Degree Murder cases and more on FLexlaw
Plaintiff in error and her brother, Ray Wynn, were tried and convicted for the murder of Curtis Smith, the husband of the plaintiff in error, the verdict being for murder in the first degree with recommendation to mercy. The evidence is entirely circumstantial and. the judgment as to Wynn is not here for review. The sole question pressed for our determination is whether or not the evidence supports the verdict as to the plaintiff in error.
When circumstantial evidence is relied on for conviction the circumstances, when taken together, must be of a conclusive nature and tendency, leading on the whole to a reasonable and moral certainty that the accused and no one else committed the offense charged. It is not sufficient *163that the facts create a strong probability of and be consistent with guilt. They must be inconsistent with innocence. Hall vs. State, 90 Fla. 719, 107 So. 246, and cases cited.
The evidence in this case in no respect meets the requirement of the rule as thus enumerated. It is not conclusive, does not lead to a reasonable and moral certainty that plaintiff in error committed the offense charged against her, is inconsistent with guilt and is perfectly consistent with innocence. Taken in its most unfavorable aspect it supports nothing stronger than a bare suspicion of guilt.
The judgment below is accordingly reversed and a new trial awarded.
Reversed.
Buford, C.J., and Whitfield, Ellis and Brown, J.J., concur.
Davis, J., disqualified.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
McCall v. State, 120 Fla. 707 (Fla. 1935)…877, 124 Sou. 444; Cannon v. State, 91 Fla. 214, 107 Sou. 360; Fall v. State, 90 Fla. 719, 107 Sou. 246; Asher v. State, 90 Fla. 75, 105 Sou. 140; Lee v. State, 96 Fla. 59, 117 So. 699; Davis v. State, 90 Fla. 816, 107 So. 245; Smith v. State, 101 Fla. 162, 133 So. 873; Simmons v. State, 99 Fla. 1215, 128 So. 486; Kennedy v. State, 31 Fla. 428, 12 So. 858; Gantling v. State, 40 Fla. 237, 23 So. 857; Pate v. State, 72 Fla. 97, 72 So. 517; Whetson v. State, 31 Fla. 240, 12 So. 661. Such evidence m…
-
Chason v. State, 148 Fla. 540 (Fla. 1941)…877, 124 So. 444; Cannon v. State, 91 Fla. 214, 107 Sp. 360; Hall v. State, 90 Fla. 719, 107 Sp. 246; Asher v. State, 90 Fla. 75, 105 So. 140; Lee v. State, 96 Fla. 59,117 So. 699; Davis v. State, 90 Fla. 816, 107 So. 245; Smith v. *Page 542 State, 101 Fla. 162, 133 So. 873; Simmons v. State, 99 Fla. 1216,128 So. 486; Kennedy v. State, 31 Fla. 428, 12 So. 858; Gantling v. State, 40 Fla. 237, 23 So. 857; Pate v. State,72 Fla. 97, 72 So. 517; Whetston v. State, 31 Fla. 240,12 So. 661. The evidence here was…
-
McCall v. State, 116 Fla. 179 (Fla. 1934)…, 98 Fla. 877, 124 So. 444; Cannon v. State, 91 Fla. 214, 107 So. 360; Fall v. State, 90 Fla. 719, 107 So. 246; Asher v. State, 90 Fla. 75, 105 So. 140; Lee v. State, 96 Fla. 59, 117 So. 699; Davis v. State, 90 Fla. 816, 107 So. 245; Smith v. State, 101 Fla. 162, 133 So. 873; Simmons v. State, 99 Fla. 1215, 128 So. 486; Kennedy v. State, 31 Fla. 428, 12 So. 858; Gantling v. State, 40 Fla. 237, 23 So. 857; Pate v. State, 72 Fla. 97, 72 So. 517; Whetson v. State, 31 Fla. 240, 12 So. 661. Such evidence must be…
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
- Doyle Hall v. State, 90 Fla. 719 (Fla. 1925)