Grisette v. State

Decision Date19 February 1963
Docket NumberNo. D-331,D-331
Citation152 So.2d 498
PartiesWoodrow 'Red' GRISETTE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals

Frank T. Cannon, Jacksonville, and D. C. Laird, Lakeland, for appellant.

Richard W. Ervin, Atty. Gen., and George R. Georgieff, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

WIGGINTON, Judge.

This is a companion case to that of Reginald Cochran v. State of Florida, Fla.App., 150 So.2d 249, in which the court has today filed an opinion affirming the judgment appealed.

Appellant Grisette, together with five other defendants, were jointly charged with the offense of grand larceny. One defendant was never found and the case proceeded to trial against the remaining five defendants named in the information. After the trial commenced, three defendants entered a plea of nolo contendere as stated above. Upon the jury's return to the court room, the trial judge addressed it as follows:

'Gentlemen, I am sorry I have to keep you back there so long, but during the time you have been back there three of these defendants, Gentlemen, the Defendant Pope and the Defendant Canady and the Defendant Reynolds have entered pleas of nolo contendere in this case and you are not to consider the case any further as to these three defendants, that is, Pope, Reynolds or Canady. But you will only consider the case from here on out as against the Defendants Grisette and Cochran.'

No objection to the foregoing statement by the trial judge was made by appellant at the time, nor was a motion for mistrial made. Appellant's first objection to the court's announcement is found in his motion for new trial.

It is appellant's contention that the court's statement to the jury that three defendants had entered nolo contendere pleas constituted harmful and prejudicial error as to the remaining defendants. It is argued that such statement had the effect of putting the jury on notice that since three of the defendants had pleaded guilty of the acts constituting the crime with which all were charged, the jury had no alternative but to convict the remaining defendants without regard to whether the evidence proved their guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. With this contention we cannot agree. It would be equally reasonable to contend that since three of the defendants had confessed responsibility for the crime, the jury had no alternative but to find that the remaining defendants were innocent and should be acquitted.

The trial jury is an...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • Ferguson v. State, 55137
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Florida
    • July 15, 1982
    ...3d DCA 1970); Walters v. State, 217 So.2d 615 (Fla. 2d DCA 1969); Vitiello v. State, 167 So.2d 629 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964); Grisette v. State, 152 So.2d 498 (Fla. 1st DCA 1963). Defendant's final point on appeal concerns the testimony of Adolphus Archie, the "wheelman" who was allowed to plead t......
  • Moore v. State, 65-409.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • May 17, 1966
    ...has filed a petition for rehearing, pointing out that our decision in this case should be controlled by the decisions in Grisette v. State, Fla.App. 1963, 152 So.2d 498, and Vitiello v. State, Fla.App. 1964, 167 So.2d In rendering our original opinion in this cause, these authorities were e......
  • Bocanegra v. State, 73--768
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • November 27, 1974
    ...Wainwright, 5th Cir. 1969, 418 F.2d 565, cert. den. 399 U.S. 933, 90 S.Ct. 2269, 26 L.Ed.2d 804. See also discussion in Grisette v. State, Fla.App.1st 1963, 152 So.2d 498. McNULTY, C.J., and GRIMES, J., concur. ...
  • Walters v. State, 68--238
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • January 15, 1969
    ...defendant has pleaded guilty or has been convicted.' Four cases are cited here on behalf of Walters on this point: Grisette v. State, Fla.App. 1963, 152 So.2d 498; Vitiello v. State, Fla.App.1964, 167 So.2d 629; Moore v. State, Fla.App. 1966, 186 So.2d 56, and Thomas v. State, Fla.App. 1967......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT