WALTER ROBINSON, ALIAS WALTER ROBERSON,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
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 court held that the evidence was sufficient for the jury to find premeditation and intent for first-degree murder.
The appellant was convicted of first-degree murder after shooting and then fatally striking his wife with an axe. The appellant argues the evidence do…
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 Question Of Fact For Jury cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellant was tried and convicted for murder in the first degree and sentenced to be electrocuted. He contends that he should be relieved of that judgment because the evidence does not show premeditation and other elements of murder in the first degree.
This court has repeatedly held that intent and premeditation were questions of fact to be determined by the jury from the evidence under appropriate instructions.
The victim of appellant’s assault was his wife. She was at her mother’s home where appellant went on the morning of the tragedy and there obtained a shotgun. The encounter took place in the yard immediately on his arrival; the appellant first shot his wife but failing to inflict a mortal wound, he went to the wood pile, picked up the axe, then carried her in the kitchen where he struck her with the axe and crushed her skull killing her instantly.
There is no dispute' about these facts. The evidence has been carefully examined and we think it is ample for a jury of reasonable men to have reached the conclusion they did.
*155Affirmed.
Brown, C. J., Whitfield, Buford, Chapman, Thomas and Adams, J. J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Larry v. State, 104 So. 2d 352 (Fla. 1958)…flow from it in so far as the life of his victim is concerned. No definite length of time for it to exist has been set and indeed could not be. Forehand v. State, 126 Fla. 464, 171 So. 241; Lowe v. State, 90 Fla. 255, 105 So. 829; Robinson v. State, 148 Fla. 153, 3 So. 2d 804. Examined as a whole, some aspects of the evidence are as fantastic and other aspects are as contradictory as are ever found. It is clear that there was bad blood between Salters and appellant; it is also shown that Salters had the re…
-
Sie Dawson v. State, 139 So. 2d 408 (Fla. 1962)…So. 692. Premeditation may be inferred from the circumstances just as other inferences of fact may be drawn by the jury. Parker v. State, 1940, 142 Fla. 210, 194 So. 484; Crawford v. State, 1941, 146 Fla. 729, 1 So. 2d 713; Robinson v. State, 1941, 148 Fla. 153, 3 So. 2d 804. In this case we think the circumstances were more than adequate to support an inference of premeditation. According to appellant’s confession Mrs. Clayton threw a hammer at him but he was not struck by it. There is no evidence to in…
-
Brock v. State, 69 So. 2d 344 (Fla. 1954)…see this baby dead than to have her raise it.” From this, and other uncontroverted evidence on the same issue, the jury had the right to find that there was a premeditated design on the part of the defendant to kill his child. See Robinson v. State, 148 Fla. 153, 3 So. 2d 804. The only real issue in the case is as to the question of insanity. After the grand jury had returned an indictment against the defendant his attorney filed a suggestion of insanity and requested a medical examination pursuant to the…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence