Bunch v. State
| Decision Date | 19 October 1909 |
| Citation | 58 Fla. 9,50 So. 534 |
| Parties | BUNCH v. STATE. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Headnotes Filed November 24, 1909.
Error to Criminal Court of Record, Suwanee County; H. E. Carter Judge.
Mamie Bunch was convicted of an assault with intent to murder in the second degree, and she brings error. Affirmed.
Syllabus by the Court
A verdict should be regarded from the standpoint of the jury's intention, and when this can be ascertained, if consistent with legal principles, such effect should be given to the findings as will really conform to their intention. If a verdict is not sufficiently certain to clearly show what the jury intended, it will be fatally defective.
The verdict of the jury was in these words: 'We, the jury find the defendant, Mamie Bunch, guilty of assault with attempt to murder in the second degree; so say we all.' Held, that the word 'attempt' carries with it the idea of intent in this verdict, and that the verdict is not fatally defective.
COUNSEL L. E. Roberson, for plaintiff in error.
Park Trammell, Atty. Gen., for the State.
Mamie Bunch, the plaintiff in error, was informed against in the criminal court of record of Suwanee county; the information charging that she and another, on the 14th of November, 1908 unlawfully assaulted one Lela Russel, from a premeditated design to kill and murder the latter. On the trial the jury found the following verdict, viz.: 'We, the jury, find the defendant, Mamie Bunch, guilty of assault with attempt to murder in the second degree; so say we all.' There was a motion to arrest the judgment on the grounds:
(1) The verdict does not find this defendant guilty of any crime known to the criminal laws of the state of Florida.
(2) The verdict is so irregular upon its face as to be unintelligible in its meaning and its findings.
This motion was overruled, and the plaintiff in error sentenced to two years in the penitentiary.
The only assignment of error is based on the action of the court in overruling this motion, and questions the sufficiency of this verdict.
In the case of Washington v. State, 55 Fla. 194, 46 So. 417, the general requisites of a verdict are stated. It is also stated that the verdict should be regarded from the standpoint of the jury's intention, and when this can be ascertained, if consistent with legal principles, such effect should be allowed to their findings as will clearly conform to their verdict. If the verdict is not sufficiently certain to clearly show what the jury intended, it will be fatally defective. Nickles v. State, 48 Fla. 46, 37 So. 312.
The contention here is that the use of the word 'attempt,' instead of the word 'intent,' vitiates the verdict, rendering it unintelligible, and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Vogel v. State
...Fla. 79, 66 So. 421. The word 'attempted' does not destroy the meaning of the verdict. It carries the significance of an intent. See Bunch v. State, supra. So the phrase 'guilty of attempted manslaughter' cannot be said to be so vague, uncertain, and meaningless as to render the court incap......
-
Mississippi Cent. R. Co. v. Roberts
... ... Md. 270, 83 A. 157; Carlson v. Ry. Co., 296 Minn ... 504, 105 N.W. 555, 113 Am. St. Rep. 655, 4 L.R.A. (N.S.) 349; ... [173 Miss. 492] State v. Dettner, 27 S.W. 1117; ... Hook v. Ry. Co., 162 Mo. 569, 63 S.W. 360; State ... v. Gurley, 70 S.W. 875; Barrie v. Co., 102 ... Mo.App ... ...
-
Fla. Dep't of Corr. v. Gould
...of a general "attempt" is the criminalization of intent rather than any particular action or result. See Bunch v. State, 58 Fla. 9, 50 So. 534, 535 (1909) (equating an "attempt" to commit a crime with the "intent" to commit it). No crime can be committed by bad thoughts alone. 1 W. LaFave ,......
-
Fla. Dep't of Corr. v. Gould
... ... Zopf v. Singletary, 686 So.2d 680 (Fla. 1st DCA ... 1996), and was later adopted in Wilcox v. State , 783 ... So.2d 1150 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001). [ 1 ] ... I ... Gould ... pleaded no contest ... criminalization of intent rather than any particular action ... or result. See Bunch v. State , 50 So. 534, 535 (Fla ... 1909) (equating an ... "attempt" to commit a crime with the ... "intent" to commit it). No ... ...