ERNEST KINCHEN, APPELLANT,
v.
THE 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.
The court held that evidence of a prior, related robbery was properly admitted and that the refusal of an incomplete jury instruction was not prejudicial error.
Appellant was convicted of robbery. The evidence presented included details of a robbery of the victim's brother immediately preceding the charged rob…
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 Overwhelming Evidence cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The appellant was found guilty of robbery by a jury and judgment and sentence were entered thereon. This appeal has arisen from that conviction and sentence. Four points are presented, two of them merit comment.
The first point urges error upon the fact that the evidence indicated that the defendant was also guilty of a robbery of the present victim’s brother, which robbery took place immediately prior to, and as a part of, the same series of incidents comprising the instant robbery. Appellant urges reversal upon the rule stated in Williams v. State, Fla.1959, 110 So. 2d 654. We hold that the evidence admitted was clearly proper under the rule stated in Horner v. State, Fla.App.1963, 149 So. 2d 863.
The second point urges error because the trial court refused an instruction submitted by appellant. The instruc tion submitted was only a portion of the instruction approved by the Supreme Court in Harrison v. State, 149 Fla. 365, 5 So. 2d 703 (1942). In its incomplete form, the instruction would not have been proper. In addition, we are convinced that no prejudicial error occurred inasmuch as the proof of appellant’s guilt was overwhelming and the finding of guilty is clearly supported on this record without the confession.
We have examined the remaining points submitted and find that they do not present error. Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Garmise v. State, 311 So. 2d 747 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975)…e, 1898, 40 Fla. 178, 24 So. 69. In the instant case there was such evidence, albeit mainly circumstantial. Incomplete and/or misleading instructions are properly denied. Wells v. State, Fla.App. 1972, 270 So. 2d 399; Hinchen v. State, Fla.App.1974, 297 So. 2d 341. The requested instruction, being an inaccurate statement of the law, was properly denied. The remaining points raised by the defendant are without merit. Therefore, no reversible error having been shown, the conviction and sentence appealed are h…
-
Deliford v. State, 505 So. 2d 523 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)…We further reject the defendant’s contention, made at oral argument, that the auto theft evidence was not otherwise admissible, as such evidence was plainly relevant in order to give an intelligent account of the crime charged. See Kinchen v. State, 297 So. 2d 341, 341 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974); Feldman v. State, 212 So. 2d 21, 22 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968); Homer v. State, 149 So. 2d 863, 865 (Fla. 3d DCA 1963). Second, we reject the defendant’s contention that the trial court erred in denying a defense motion for a mist…
-
Taylor v. State, 320 So. 2d 428 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975)…proper instructions as to their function in weighing these admissions. The evidence outside the admissions is contradictory and not so overwhelming as to make the failure to give the requested instruction harmless. Kinchen v. State, Fla.App.3d 1974, 297 So. 2d 341. Accordingly, the judgment and sentence of the trial court are vacated and the case is remanded to the trial court for a new trial. GRIMES, Acting C. J., and SCHWARTZ, ALAN R., Associate Judge, concur.…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Williams v. State, 110 So. 2d 654 (Fla. 1959)
- Harrison v. State, 5 So.2d 703 (Fla. 1942)
- Horner v. State, 149 So. 2d 863 (Fla. 3d DCA 1963)