Clifton v. State
| Decision Date | 28 July 1890 |
| Citation | 7 So. 863,26 Fla. 523 |
| Parties | CLIFTON v. STATE. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Error to circuit court, Volusia county; JOHN D. BROOME, Judge.
Syllabus by the Court
1. The indictment charged the defendant with breaking and entering a building (store) in the night-time, with intent to commit a felony, to-wit, larceny, and the court charged the jury, if they found that the defendant broke and entered the building as charged in the indictment, they should convict. Held, that the charge referred to the indictment in its entirety, the time of the breaking and entering being included, and was therefore not erroneous in not charging more specifically that the breaking and entering must be in the night-time.
2. There were $600 worth of goods in the store at the time, and upon going to the store some time during the night the owner found that some one was inside, whereupon he hallooed, and the defendant and another person jumped out of a window which had been broken open, and upon entering the store the owner found various articles of merchandise packed in sacks. Held that the evidence was sufficient to warrant the jury in coming to the conclusion that the defendant broke and entered the building with the intent to steal goods of the value of more than $20.
3. The charge of the court and charges given upon request of the state and the accused should be considered together, and if as a whole, the charge is correct, the verdict will not be set aside upon the ground of alleged error in the charge.
COUNSEL Foster & Gunby, for plaintiff in error.
William B. Lamar, Atty. Gen., for defendant in error.
Daniel Clifton, Jr., plaintiff in error, was tried and convicted upon an indictment charging him with breaking and entering a building in the night-time, with intent to commit a felony on the 1st day of May, 1889. The defendant moved for new trial. The motion was overruled, and the case is brought here upon writ of error.
No assignment of errors has been filed, but counsel for plaintiff in error contend that the trial judge in his charge did not give the law of the case, and that he erred in giving certain charges, and in refusing to give others requested by plaintiff in error, and in overruling the motion for new trial. We have carefully considered the charges given and those refused, and, considering all the charges together, in our judgment they correctly state the law of the case. The court charged the jury that 'if they believed from the evidence that Daniel Clifton, Jr., broke and entered the building, as charged in the indictment. with intent to commit a felony, to-wit, larceny of the property of W. R. Revels of the value of more than twenty dollars, it is not necessary to prove that the defendant took any property, the intent being the gist of the larceny.' This part of the charge, it is contended, is defective in not charging that, to make out the offense, the breaking and entering must occur in the night-time. We do not think that this...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Keigans v. State
...intended to kill the deceased, it would make no difference at what precise time he made up him mind to kill deceased. In Clifton v. State, 26 Fla. 523, 7 South. 863, where the words 'as charged in the were used in a charge given, this court held that 'the charge referred to the indictment i......
-
State v. Waters
...589 (Fla.1957); Turknett v. State, 116 Fla. 562, 156 So. 538 (1934); Walker v. State, 44 Fla. 466, 32 So. 954 (1902); Clifton v. State, 26 Fla. 523, 7 So. 863 (1890); Charles v. State, 36 Fla. 691, 18 So. 369 (1895); Jackson v. State, 300 So.2d 47 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974), cert. denied, 312 So.2d......
-
Davis v. State
... ... of error. The entire charge of the court should be considered ... as a whole in determining the propriety of an exception to ... any portion thereof, and, if the charge as a whole is ... correct, there is no ground of exception. Clifton v ... State, 26 Fla. 523, 7 So. 863. Exceptions to other [44 ... Fla. 47] charges, however, directly present the question as ... to the proper test in determining mental irresponsibility, ... and the question may be considered under this assignment of ... error. McNaghten's Case, referred to ... ...
-
State v. Ankney
...case, but in this day and age all but neophyte criminals are aware of the consequences of leaving fingerprints. In Clifton v. State, 26 Fla. 523, 7 So. 863 (1890), a case closely analogous to that at bar, the Florida Supreme Court in upholding the sufficiency of the evidence in a burglary c......