Burns v. State
| Decision Date | 03 April 1925 |
| Citation | 104 So. 447,89 Fla. 353 |
| Parties | BURNS v. STATE. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
En Banc.
Error to Circuit Court, Volusia County; J. J. Dickinson, Judge.
George F. Burns was convicted of murder in the first degree, and he brings error.
Affirmed.
Syllabus by the Court
Excluding testimony of conclusions for purpose of impeachment is not error, particularly where on record no harm could have resulted from such exclusion. It is not error to exclude testimony of mere conclusions for purposes of impeachment particularly where on the record no harm could have resulted from such exclusion.
On statement on voir dire by juror that he could render impartial verdict based on evidence and law, and if he had reasonable doubt would find accused not guilty, letting him serve as juror was not error. Where a proposed juror states on voir dire that he could render a fair and impartial verdict, based entirely upon the evidence and the law as given by the court, and that, if there be a reasonable doubt in his mind as to the defendant's guilt, he would find him not guilty, and there is nothing in the voir dire examination to indicate that the juror was not legally qualified, or that he was in fact not impartial, it is not error to let him serve as a juror in the case.
In absence of challenge because juror served on grand jury returning indictment, or showing that he participated in finding indictment, or that he was present when grand jury heard and considered case, letting him serve as trial juror was not error. Where a juror is not challenged because he served on the grand jury that found the indictment, and it does not appear that such juror participated in finding the particular indictment, or that he was present when the grand jury heard or considered the case, it is not error to let him serve as a trial juror in the case.
Scarlett & Jordan, of De Land, for plaintiff in error.
Rivers Buford, Atty. Gen., and Marvin C. McIntosh, Asst. Atty. Gen for the State.
This writ of error was taken to a judgment of conviction of murder in the first degree, with a recommendation to mercy, the sentence being to life imprisonment. The indictment charged the plaintiff in error with murder in the first degree, and the verdict responds thereto.
At the trial, a witness, in testifying as to the circumstances of the homicide, committed on a highway in an automobile, stated that her husband, Charles Brown, fired the first shot at the deceased, a taxi driver, while sitting back of him, and that afterwards her husband and the defendant, who was traveling with the witness and her husband, took the helpless body of the deceased from the car, and two more shots were fired after the deceased was lying on the ground. The witness denied that she had told a companion in jail that the defendant was innocent, and that her husband did it all. The jail...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Leach v. State, 30952
...mind by the jurors in question. Their position offers no ground for reversal. Ex parte Sullivan, 155 Fla. 111, 19 So.2d 611; Burns v. State, 89 Fla. 353, 104 So. 447; Section 913.04, Florida Statutes, F.S.A.; 31 Am.Jur. 'Jury' Sections 154-156. The final contention relied upon by the appell......
-
Pitts v. State
...mind by the jurors in question. Their position offers no ground for reversal. Ex parte Sullivan, 155 Fla. 111, 19 So.2d 611; Burns v. State, 89 Fla. 353, 104 So. 447; Section 913.04, Florida Statutes, F.S.A.; 31 Am.Jur. 'Jury' Sections 154--156.' (132 So.3d at page 333) (See also Slaughter ......
- Stephenson v. State
-
State v. Rodgers
...mind by the jurors in question. Their position offers no ground for reversal. Ex parte Sullivan, 155 Fla. 111, 19 So.2d 611; Burns v. State, 89 Fla. 353, 104 So. 447; Section 913.04, Florida Statutes, F.S.A.; 31 Am.Jur. 'Jury' Sections 154-156." (Emphasis It is contended by respondent that ......