CHARLIE HOLLOWAY
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 conviction and that the failure to admonish jurors was not an abuse of discretion.
Appellant was convicted of murder and sentenced to death after shooting his estranged wife multiple times. He claimed self-defense, alleging his wife …
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 Murder cases and more on FLexlaw
This appeal is from a conviction of murder and sentence to death. Appellant questions the sufficiency of the evidence.
Charlie Holloway shot his estranged wife six times with a pistol which he had recently acquired from a pawnshop. Two bullets entered the left side of her breast; one bullet entered her head at the bottom of her ear and came out on the right side of her face; another bullet entered her head at the base of the back of the skull; another entered the top *136of her head, and the sixth entered her back under her right shoulder and came out on the front side of her stomach. Any one of these bullet wounds would have been mortal.
Appellant claims self-defense, saying that' his wife • had assaulted him with a pistol. Aside from the fact that this claim came at a late period in the history of the case, we are satisfied that the jury had ample evidence to reject the plea of self defense.
The other question relates to the failure of the court to admonish the jurors to remain together, pursuant to Sec. 918.06, F. S. ’41, F.S.A. We fail to find an abuse of discretion or resulting injury which would warrant us in disturbing the judgment.
Affirmed.
CHAPMAN, C. J., TERRELL, BROWN, BUFORD and SEBRING, JJ., concur.
THOMAS, J., agrees to conclusion.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Kennick v. State, 107 So. 2d 59 (Fla. 1st DCA 1958)…It will be seen that the statute affords discretionary power to the judge to allow jurors to separate before the cause has been finally submitted to them. This power has been sustained in respect to a jury sworn to try the issues. Holloway v. State, 156 Fla. 135, 22 So. 2d 644. It is generally held in other jurisdictions (absent statutory authority) that the same discretion exists where a prospective jury is permitted to separate prior to the time it has been sworn to try the cause. See Epps v. State, 28 Al…