Armstrong v. State
| Decision Date | 11 April 1891 |
| Citation | 27 Fla. 366,9 So. 1 |
| Parties | ARMSTRONG v. STATE. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Error to criminal court of record, Duval county; JAMES M. BAKER Judge.
Syllabus by the Court
1. A charge by the trial judge that 'when insanity is set up as a defense in a criminal case it must be established to the satisfaction of the jury by a preponderance of the evidence and a reasonable doubt of the defendant's sanity, raised by all the evidence, does not justify an acquittal,' is erroneous.
2. In criminal cases, where the plea of insanity is set up as a defense, and evidence is introduced which tends to rebut the presumption of sanity on the part of the accused, and the jury entertain a reasonable doubt, after considering all the evidence as to his sanity, it is their duty to acquit him.
3. The case of Hodge v. State, (Fla.) 7 South. Rep. 593, on this subject, approved and followed.
COUNSEL Frank W. Pope, for plaintiff in error.
William B. Lamar, Atty. Gen., for the State.
The plaintiff in error, Robert Armstrong, was indicted in the Duval circuit court on the 8th day of May, A. D. 1890, for the murder of Carleton Lowe. After arraignment under this indictment, and a plea of not guilty, the plaintiff in error was, at a term of the circuit court of Duval county, Fla and on the 14th day of May, A. D. 1890, convicted of murder in the first degree, and the sentence of death was passed upon him. From the final judgment of the court, imposing the death penalty, Robert Armstrong, defendant below, and plaintiff in error here, prosecutes a writ of error to this court.
The record reveals the fact that Carleton Lowe was, on the 26th day of February, 1890, about the hour of 9 o'clock P. M in the city of Jacksonville, Duval county, Fla., shot and instantly killed by the accused, Robert Armstrong. On the trial testimony was introduced which tended to show that Armstrong was insane at the time Carleton Lowe was killed. On the subject of insanity the trial judge charged the jury as follows: 'When insanity is set up as a defense in a criminal case, it must be established to the satisfaction of the jury by a preponderance of the evidence and a reasonable doubt of the defendant's sanity, raised by all the evidence, does not justify an acquittal.' Again: The court gave to the jury other instructions on the subject of insanity, but the sufficiency of evidence required to sustain a plea of insanity presented in the foregoing charges was not modified by the court in any other instruction given. The view of the law presented by the trial...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Scott v. State
... ... merely for your enlightenment and consideration, and you are ... the sole judges yourselves of all the facts and circumstances ... and evidence in the case as to the defendant's sanity or ... insanity at the time of the commission of the alleged ... offense.' ... In ... Armstrong v. State, 30 Fla. 170, 11 So. 618, 17 L ... R. A. 484, this court held that: 'Nonexpert witnesses ... cannot express a general opinion as to sanity, nor can they ... give an opinion independent of the facts and circumstances ... within their own knowledge; but they can detail the facts ... ...
-
Williams v. State
... ... either in the assignments or in the brief of plaintiff in ... error. The attorneys of the plaintiff in error simply remark, ... 'We think the court erred in refusing to charge the jury ... as requested' in their instructions, and refer us to ... Armstrong v. State, 30 Fla. 170, 11 So. 618, 17 L ... R. A. 484; Armstrong v. State, 27 Fla. 366, 9 So. 1, ... 26 Am. St. Rep. 72; Hodge v. State, 26 Fla. 11, 7 ... So. 593; Garner v. State, 28 Fla. 113, 9 So. 835, 29 ... Am. St. Rep. 232; Commonwealth v. Rogers, 7 Metc ... (Mass.) 500, 41 ... ...
-
Brown v. State
... ... that was excepted to, and is assigned as the fifth and last ... assignment of error, is in accord with the former rulings of ... this court, and states the law correctly. [40 Fla. 466] ... Hodge v. State, 26 Fla. 11, 7 So. 593; Armstrong ... v. State, 27 Fla. 366, 9 So. 1, and authorities cited; ... Armstrong v. State, 30 Fla. 170, 11 So. 618 ... The ... evidence in the record fully sustains the verdict rendered; ... and, finding no errors, the judgment of the circuit court is ... hereby ... ...
-
Armstrong v. State
...occurred in May, A. D. 1890, and on writ of error to this court the judgment of the trial court was reversed, and a new trial awarded. 27 Fla. 366, 9 South. 1. This reversal was upon the ground of misdirection of the jury by the court. In December A. D. 1891, another trial resulted in a ver......