ELIZA JOHNSON AND MARVEL FOWLER, PLAINTIFFS-IN-ERROR,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, DEFENDANT-IN-ERROR

Fla. | 1931-02-10
Strum, C.J., and Ellis and Brown, J.J., concur., Whitfield, P. J., and Terrell and Buford, J. J., concur in the opinion and judgment.
101 Fla. 830 Florida Supreme Court (1931)

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.

Synopsis

The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a conviction for second-degree murder, holding that the evidence presented was sufficient to support the jury's verdict despite contradictions. The court rejected the defendants' arguments based on their first-offense status and family responsibilities.


Holding

Yes, the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict of second-degree murder. The court found no reason to disturb the jury's resolution of contradictory evidence.


Key Quotes

“The sole assignment relied on for reversal is, the sufficiency of the evidencé to support the verdict.”

This quote states the primary legal issue raised on appeal.

Previewing 1 of 4 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

Eliza Johnson and Marvel Fowler were indicted for first-degree murder and subsequently convicted of second-degree murder. They were sentenced to thirt…

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.


Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam.

Per Curiam.

Plaintiffs in Error were indicted and tried for murder in the first degree and were convicted of murder in the second degree. They were sentenced to thirty years in the state penitentiary and took writ of error to that judgment. The sole assignment relied on for reversal is, the sufficiency of the evidencé to support the verdict.

Ve have examined the evidence carefully and while as in most cases of this character, it is contradictory in the extreme, the jury resolved the contradictions against the defendants and we see no reason to disturb their finding. The evidence is ample to support the verdict and is readily reconciled with it. Plaintiffs in Error contend that they should be relieved of the judgment imposed on them because this is their first offense and they have families but we are aware of no law to support this contention and the contention is not supported by any.

Affirmed.

Strum, C.J., and Ellis and Brown, J.J., concur.

Whitfield, P. J., and Terrell and Buford, J. J., concur in the opinion and judgment.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw