JOHN C. WOMACK, APPELLANT,
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.
Appellant's perjury convictions reversed because the State presented only one witness's testimony without independent corroborating evidence, violating Florida's requirement that perjury be proved by two witnesses or one witness plus corroborating circumstances of equal weight.
Perjury convictions must be reversed when the State presents only a single witness without independent corroborating circumstances of equal weight to a second witness.
[1] Perjury convictions require proof by two witnesses or by one witness accompanied by independent corroborating circumstances deemed of equal weight with another witness.
Previewing 1 of 1 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“To convict of the crime of perjury the offense must be proved by the oaths of two witnesses, or by the oath of one witness and by other independent and corroborating circumstances which is deemed of equal weight with another witness.”
Statement of the legal standard for proving perjury in Florida.
Appellant was convicted of two counts of perjury in a judicial proceeding based on the State's evidence at trial.…
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 Two-Witness Rule For Perjury cases and more on FLexlaw
OWEN, Chief Judge.
Appellant was convicted of two counts of perjury in a judicial proceeding, from which he brings this direct appeal.
Appellant’s first point is disposi-tive of the case. He contends, and we agree, that the trial court erred in failing to grant his motion for judgment of acquittal, or directed verdict, made at the close of the State’s case in chief, on the grounds that the evidence was not sufficient to justify submission of the cause to the jury. To convict of the crime of per jury the offense must be proved by the oaths of two witnesses, or by the oath of one witness and by other independent and corroborating circumstances which is deemed of equal weight with another witness. Rader v. State, Fla.1951, 52 So. 2d 105; Keir v. State, 1943, 152 Fla. 389, 11 So. 2d 886; Tindall v. State, 1930, 99 Fla. 1132, 128 So. 494; Yarbrough v. State, 1920, 79 Fla. 256, 83 So. 873; Wells v. State, Fla.App.1972, 270 So. 2d 399; Duval v. State, Fla.App.1958, 104 So. 2d 789. As to each count, the State’s evidence consisted solely of the testimony of a single witness unaccompanied by independent and corroborating circumstances bearing on the alleged false testimony.
The judgment and sentence as to each count are severally reversed and this cause remanded with instructions to discharge the defendant, appellant herein.
Reversed.
WALDEN and CROSS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Mitchell v. State, 359 So. 2d 906 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978)…efore, appellant contends that his conviction must fall because of the “two witness rule” which requires the crime of perjury to be proved by two witnesses or by one witness and other independent and corroborating circumstances. See Womack v. State, 283 So. 2d 573 (Fla. 4th DCA 1973). Appellant interprets the rule too broadly. Careful analysis indicates that the common law requirement of more than the testimony of one witness in a perjury trial is limited to proof of the falsity of the accused’s statement. T…
-
Nogues v. State, 762 So. 2d 967 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000)…hat was equivalent to the testimony of a second perjury witness. Orrett’s testimony is therefore the only foundation for the perjury conviction; because that testimony is legally insufficient the perjury conviction cannot stand. See Womack v. State, 283 So. 2d 573 (Fla. 4th DCA 1973). The judgment of conviction and sentence are reversed and this cause is remanded with directions to discharge the defendant. REVERSED. . The perjury charge that related to the second meeting ended in a judgment of acquittal fo…
Authorities Cited
- Keir v. State, 152 Fla. 389 (Fla. 1943)
- Will Tindall v. State, 99 Fla. 1132 (Fla. 1930)
- Yarbrough v. State, 79 Fla. 256 (Fla. 1920)
- Rader v. State, 52 So.2d 105 (Fla. 1951)
- Wells v. State, 270 So. 2d 399 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972)
- Duval v. State, 104 So. 2d 789 (Fla. 2d DCA 1958)