Crawford v. State
| Decision Date | 23 May 1923 |
| Citation | 96 So. 837,85 Fla. 498 |
| Parties | CRAWFORD v. STATE. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Error to Criminal Court of Record, Duval County; James M. Peeler, Judge.
N. S. Crawford was convicted of embezzlement of personal property of the value of $50, and he brings error.
Reversed.
Syllabus by the Court
To sustain conviction of embezzlement of property for value of $50, proof of such value and fraudulent conversion necessary. To establish guilt upon a charge of embezzlement of property of the value of $50 or more, proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the property stolen was of the value of $50 or more, and that it was fraudulently converted by the accused, is necessary.
Conviction reversed where not substantially proved. Where the offense charged in a criminal prosecution is not in substance proved, the judgment should on writ of error be reversed.
COUNSEL Ion L. Farris, of Jacksonville, and L. S. Wade, of Green Cove Springs, for plaintiff in error.
Rivers Buford, Atty. Gen., and Marvin C. MeIntosh, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
Upon an indictment for embezzlement of one hog of the value of $50, there was a trial resulting in a verdict of guilty as charged. The accused thereupon was adjudged guilty by the court. To review this judgment writ of error was taken from this court.
One question only is presented, namely, the sufficiency of the evidence to support the verdict. This question was presented by motion for new trial, which was denied, and this ruling is assigned as error.
The contention is that the value of the hog was not proved. In the absence of proof of material elements of the crime charged, a judgment of conviction should be reversed. Carnley v. State, 82 Fla. 282, 89 So. 808; Rast v. State, 79 Fla. 772, 84 So. 683; Sykes v. State, 78 Fla. 167, 82 So. 778; Franklin v. State, 66 Fla. 213, 63 So. 418; Cloud v. State, 64 Fla. 237, 60 So. 180. Because of the inconclusive nature of the proof, both as to value and fraudulent conversion of the property alleged to have been taken, the judgment in this case will be reversed for a new trial.
Reversed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Stephens v. State
...and a new trial awarded. Knowles v. State, 86 Fla. 270, 97 So. 716.' See also Moody v. State, 76 Fla. 23, 79 So. 294; Crawford v. State, 85 Fla. 498, 96 So. 837; Pollard v. State, 61 Fla. 44, 55 So. 380, Howell v. State, 102 Fla. 612, 136 So. 456, 139 So. 187. Because of the inconclusive ch......
-
Hurley v. State
...as the guilty party, otherwise the judgment should not be permitted to stand. Pollard v. State, 61 Fla. 44, 55 So, 380; Crawford v. State, 85 Fla. 498, 96 So. 837; Bloodgood v. State, 94 Fla. 639, 114 So. A careful study of the evidence leaves one in grave doubt as to who was responsible fo......
- City of Sarasota v. Knight & Wall Co.