Padgett v. State
| Decision Date | 20 November 1922 |
| Citation | 94 So. 865,84 Fla. 590 |
| Parties | PADGETT v. STATE. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Rehearing Denied Jan. 19, 1923.
Error to Criminal Court of Record, Duval County; James M. Peeler Judge.
R. R Padgett was convicted of perjury, and he brings error.
Affirmed.
Syllabus by the Court
No material or harmful errors of law or procedure being made to appear in the record of the trial, the judgment herein of conviction of perjury is affirmed.
Unless errors of trial court injuriously affect rights of complaining party, judgment not disturbed. A judgment should not be reversed or a new trial granted in any case for errors in rulings on admission or rejection of evidence, or for errors in giving or refusing charges, or for errors in any other matter of procedure or practice, unless it shall appear to the court, from a consideration of the entire cause, that such errors injuriously affect the substantial rights of the complaining party.
Unless judgment unsupported by any evidence or clearly contrary thereto, it will not be disturbed. A judgment should not be reversed or a new trial granted on the ground that the verdict is not sustained by the evidence, unless it appears that there was no substantial evidence to support the finding, or that upon the whole evidence the verdict is clearly wrong, or that the jury were not governed by the evidence in making their finding.
Ion L. Farris, of Jacksonville, for plaintiff in error.
Rivers Buford, Atty. Gen., and Marvin C. McIntosh, Asst. Atty. Gen for the State.
The judgment herein of conviction for perjury has ample support in competent testimony, and no material or harmful errors of law or procedure are made to appear; therefore the judgment should be and is affirmed.
The judgment should not be reversed, or a new trial granted, in any case, civil or criminal, for errors in rulings upon admission or rejection of evidence, or for errors in giving or refusing charges, or for errors in any other matter of procedure or practice, unless it shall appear to the court from a consideration of the entire cause, that such errors injuriously affect the substantial rights of the complaining party. Nor should a judgment be reversed, or a new trial granted, on the ground that the verdict is not sustained by the evidence, unless it appears that there was no substantial evidence to support the finding, or that upon the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Palmes v. State
...judgment. A judgment will not be reversed unless the error was prejudicial to the substantial rights of the appellant. Padgett v. State, 84 Fla. 590, 94 So. 865 (1922); Kirby v. State, 44 Fla. 81, 32 So. 836 (1902). This long standing decisional rule has also been enacted as a statute. § 92......
- Boone v. Gay