Croft v. State

Decision Date24 August 1932
Citation143 So. 599,106 Fla. 519
PartiesCROFT v. STATE.
CourtFlorida Supreme Court

En Banc.

Error to Circuit Court, Putnam County; George William Jackson Judge.

J. L Croft was convicted of conspiring to commit embezzlement, and he brings error.

Reversed.

COUNSEL

Thomas B. Dowda, of Palatka, for plaintiff in error.

Cary D. Landis, Atty. Gen., and Roy Compbell, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

OPINION

BUFORD, C.J.

Plaintiff in error was convicted in the circuit court of Putnam county under an indictment in the following language:

'In the Name of the State of Florida.
'In the Circuit Court of the Twenty-fifth Judicial Circuit of the State of Florida, for Putnam County, at the Fall Term Thereof, in the Year of our Lord One Thousand Nine Hundred and thirty-one,
'The grand jurors of the state of Florida, inquiring in and for the County of Putnam, upon their oaths present that J. L. Croft and Elvy Woods, late of the County of Putnam aforesaid, in the Circuit and State aforesaid, laborer, on the 7th day of September, in the year of our Lord One Thousand Nine Hundred and thirty-one, with force of arms and in the County of Putnam aforesaid, unlawfully and feloniously did agree, conspire, combine and confederate together to commit a certain offense, to wit: embezzlement of a certain Ford automobile, motor number 1310083, a better description of said property being to the Grand Jurors unknown, against the form of the statute in such case made and provided, to the evil example of all others in like manner offending, and against the peace and dignity of the State of Florida.
'Overt Act.
'And the Grand Jurors aforesaid upon their oaths aforesaid, do further present that the said J. L. Croft and Elvy Woods in the County of Putnam, State of Florida, on the 7th day of September, A. D. 1931, did do certain acts to effect the object of the said unlawful and felonious conspiracy, combination, confederacy and agreement, that is to say: That on the 7th day of September, A. D. 1931, in the County and State aforesaid, the said J. L. Croft was in possession of one Ford automobile, engine number 1310083, the property, goods and chattels of General Motors Acceptance Corporation, a corporation, and that he the said J. L. Croft then and there agreed with the said Elvy Woods for the said Elvy Woods to take said automobile and do away with the same in such a manner that the lawful owner, the General Motor Acceptance Corporation, a corporation, would be deprived of its said property.

'And so The Grand Jurors aforesaid, on their oaths aforesaid, do say that the said defendants, at the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • State Ex Rel. Williams v. Coleman
    • United States
    • Florida Supreme Court
    • April 4, 1938
    ... ... against the laws of Florida. It is true that a conspiracy to ... commit a crime is prohibited by the laws of Florida. If the ... above indictment fails to state a crime per se, then the ... conspiracy falls of its own weight. See Croft v ... State, 106 Fla. 519, 143 So. 599. A pertinent summary of ... the indictment appearing in one of the briefs is, viz.: ... '1 ... Williams, DuBose and Ferguson were City Commissioners of the ... City of Miami ... '2 ... They agreed, conspired, combined and ... ...
  • State ex rel. Kelly v. Whisnant
    • United States
    • Florida Supreme Court
    • May 27, 1955
    ...it was wholly void. This court is committed to that doctrine. State ex rel. Williams v. Coleman, 131 Fla. 892, 180 So. 357; Croft v. State, 106 Fla. 519, 143 So. 599; State ex rel. Tatham v. Coleman, 122 Fla. 819, 166 So. 221; State v. Alred, Fla., 68 So.2d 894; Section 11, Declaration of R......
  • Arcadia Citrus Growers' Ass'n v. Supervisors, Inc.
    • United States
    • Florida Supreme Court
    • August 24, 1932
    ... ... least, confusing. The language used in the charges shows that ... the trial court was somewhat confused and did not state the ... proposition of law attempted to be stated so clearly that he, ... in considering the same later, could not say that a jury ... might not ... ...
  • S.K.S. Holding Co. v. Vans Agnew
    • United States
    • Florida Supreme Court
    • September 28, 1932

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT