WESLEY LEE COLBERT AND JIMMY LEE JONES, APPELLANTS,
v.
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.
Wesley Lee Colbert and Jimmy Lee Jones appealed their robbery convictions based on insufficient evidence. The court affirmed the convictions, holding that the evidence was legally sufficient to support the jury verdict and that appellate courts may not substitute their judgment for the jury's on factual issues.
The court held that the evidence was amply sufficient to sustain the verdict and judgment. The court affirmed the convictions, finding that the jury properly reconciled the conflicting factual evidence presented by the state and the defense.
[1] Evidence is legally sufficient to sustain a jury verdict and judgment when it includes positive identification by the victim and an admission of guilt by the defendant.
[2] An appellate court will not substitute its judgment for that of the jury on factual issues when the evidence is legally sufficient to support the verdict and the trial is…
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“It is not the province of an appellate Court to substitute its judgment upon factual issues for that of the jury in cases where the evidence is legally sufficient to support the verdict and the trial is otherwise devoid of error.”
Establishes the fundamental appellate standard: appellate courts defer to jury verdicts on factual matters when evidence is legally sufficient
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceOn June 24, 1970, Colbert and Jones were charged with armed robbery of George House. The victim positively identified both appellants as the robbers. …
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 Jury'S Role In Weighing Evidence cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellants Wesley Lee Colbert and Jimmie Lee Jones jointly appeal from a judgment and sentence entered against them for robbery, consequent upon an adverse verdict after a jury trial.
On June 24, 1970 Colbert and Jones were jointly informed against for the armed robbery of one George House. The only point urged on appeal is the insufficiency of the evidence to convict. We have reviewed the evidence and the record before us and find it amply sufficient to sustain the verdict and judgment.
Colbert and Jones were positively identified as being the robbers by the victim himself, George House. Furthermore one George Otis Troy, uncle of appellant Colbert, testifying as a State’s witness, stated that the night after the robbery he had a conversation with Colbert and Jones at which time they admitted robbing and shooting a “fellow by the name of House”. This conversation was reported to the police, who went to arrest Colbert. When they got to his home they were admitted by *783his mother. The officer went to his bedroom, and found him hiding, lying down, on top of a closet. The defendants contended in their own behalf at the trial that they were at home at the time of the robbery and their mothers testified in their support.
It is obvious that a clear-cut factual issue is thus made out which it was peculiarly proper for the jurors to reconcile, which they did by their verdict. In such situation, the case is on all fours with that of State of Florida, petitioner, v. Smith, respondent, 249 So.2d 16, decided by the Supreme Court of Florida on May 12, 1971, wherein the conviction for rape and burglary was held proper in the face of a similar factual line of cleavage. Disposing of the case the high Court in Smith said:
“A * * * jury evaluated the evidence, including the credibility of the witnesses, presented in this case and found respondent guilty of the offenses charged. On appeal, the District Court determined that the evidence supported the conviction and the trial was free of error. Once that determination was made, the duty of the District Court was to affirm the conviction.”
It is not the province of an appellate Court to substitute its judgment upon factual issues for that of the jury in cases where the evidence is legally sufficient to support the verdict and the trial is otherwise devoid of error. See Spataro v. State, Fla.App.1965, 179 So.2d 873; Devlin v. State, Fla.App.1965, 175 So.2d 82, and
State, Fla.App.1971, 245 So.2d Harrell v. 302.
The judgment appealed is therefore
Affirmed.
LILES and McNULTY, JJ„ concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Spataro v. State, 179 So. 2d 873 (Fla. 2d DCA 1965)
- Woodward v. Edwards, 249 So. 2d 16 (Fla. 1971)
- State v. Smith, 249 So. 2d 16 (Fla. 1971)
- Devlin v. State, 175 So. 2d 82 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965)