Douglass v. State

• Decision Date: 06 March 1907
• Citation: 43 So. 424,53 Fla. 27
• Parties: DOUGLASS v. STATE.
• Court: Florida Supreme Court

43 So. 424

53 Fla. 27

DOUGLASS v. STATE.

Florida Supreme Court, Division B.

March 6, 1907

Error to Criminal Court of Record, Orange County; J. D. Beggs Judge.

H. F Douglass was convicted of manslaughter, and brings error. Reversed and remanded.

Syllabus by the Court

SYLLABUS

Where the count in an information upon which a party is convicted is intended to stand alone, and it is not 'so vague indistinct, and indefinite as to mislead the accused and embarrass him in the preparation of his defense, or expose him after conviction or acquital to substantial danger of a new prosecution for the same offense,' it is sufficient.

It is not a good ground of objection to the count in an information upon which a party was convicted that other persons who were material witnesses for him were joined as accessories in the said count, especially when they were called by him and testified fully in his behalf.

Where the charges given by the trial judge are unobjectionable as far as they extend, it is not a ground of objection to them that they do not cover certain phases of the case which the accused thinks is material to his defense. His proper course is to request instructions upon those phases of the case.

In determining the propriety of a given charge, all the charges and instructions should be considered, and if, when so considered, they fairly present the law of the case in such manner as not to be misleading, no reversible error has occurred.

The trial court commits no error in refusing to permit a question to a witness on cross-examination which has no apparent relevancy to the issue.

The trial court commits no reversible error in refusing to allow the accused, upon objection by the state, to introduce evidence, which if it had been introduced, would not have been of any avail to the accused.

The evidence examined, and found sufficient to sustain the verdict.

The sentence in this case is found defective under the rule laid down in Thompson v. State (Fla.) 41 So. 899, and therefore the judgment is reversed, and the cause remanded for a proper sentence.

COUNSEL

Bryan & Bryan and Massey & Warlow, for plaintiff in error.

W. H. Ellis, Atty. Gen., for the State.

OPINION

HOCKER J.

The plaintiff in error, Harman F. Douglass, hereafter referred to as the plaintiff, was convicted of manslaughter in the criminal court of record of Orange county, in June, 1906, and from the sentence and judgment entered has sued out a writ of error from this court. The only count of the information necessary to be considered is the second, which is as follows, viz.:

'And the county solicitor aforesaid, under oath as aforesaid, further information makes that Harman F. Douglass, late of the county of Orange aforesaid, in the county and state aforesaid, laborer, on the 1st day of March, in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and six, and continuously from said date until the 29th day of March, 1906, with force and arms, at and in the county of Orange and state of Florida aforesaid, at a certain turpentine camp then and there being operated in the said county of Orange and state of Florida, the said Harman F. Douglass having then and there the direction, management, and control of the said turpentine camp, and by reason thereof having then and there the supreme custody and control of one George Campbell, the said George Campbell being then and there held as a prisoner in said turpentine camp by the said Harman F. Douglass, and the said Harman F. Douglass, by virtue of so having the supreme control and custody of the said George Campbell as aforesaid, being under the legal duty to provide for the necessary protection of the life and health of the said George Campbell, and under the legal duty to provide for and furnish all and sufficient medicines, medical and surgical care and attention, and proper food and nursing in case of sickness of the said George Campbell while so in his supreme control and custody, and having the means to discharge all of his herein recited duties, and the said George Campbell, being so held as a prisoner, being unable by reason thereof to provide for himself the necessary medicines, medical care, and attention, and proper food and nursing, and the said George Campbell being then and there ill and crippled from certain grievous wounds, inflammations, and sores upon his feet and body (a better description of which is to the county solicitor unknown), the said Harman F. Douglass did then and there unlawfully, feloniously, and culpably fail and neglect to provide the necessary food, care, nursing, medicines, and medical care and attention and treatment for the said George Campbell, proper and needful for the said George Campbell in his said ill and crippled condition, by reason whereof the said George Campbell then and there sickened and languished of a mortal sickness so as aforesaid caused, produced, permitted, and procured, feloniously and with culpable negligence then and there by the said Harman F. Douglass, until the 29th day of March, 1906, on which said 29th day of March, 1906, the said George Campbell, of the said mortal sickness so as aforesaid caused, produced, permitted, and procured, feloniously and of his culpable negligence by the said Harman F. Douglass, then and there died.

'And the county solicitor aforesaid, under oath as aforesaid, further information makes that James F. Lowry and Arthur Lowry, late of the county of Orange aforesaid, in the county and state aforesaid, laborers, were then and there, at the time and place of the commission of the felony aforesaid, feloniously present, and did then and there unlawfully, feloniously, and culpably counsel, aid, incite, abet and procure the said Harman F. Douglass the said felony in manner and form and by the means aforesaid then and there to do and commit.

'And so the county solicitor aforesaid, under oath as aforesaid, does say that the said Harman F. Douglass, James F. Lowry, and Arthur Lowry the said George Campbell, in the manner and by the means aforesaid, unlawfully, feloniously, and of their culpable negligence aforesaid did then and there kill and slay.'

The plaintiff at and before the time of the alleged offense, was in charge of a convict camp near Gabriella, in Orange county, and had control of the convicts placed in the said camp, including George Campbell, described in the information.

The evidence shows, we think, beyond any reasonable doubt, that Campbell was a convict, and was placed in charge of the plaintiff about the 1st of January, 1906. At that time, and until about the 1st of March, 1906, he appears to have been in reasonably good health. At about the latter date Campbell's feet, and especially one of them, became diseased, so that he could not walk to and from his work in the turpentine farm, and he stayed around the stockade in which the convicts were confined when not at work. He became worse, and about the 22d of March, a physician, who had been summoned to the camp to attend a convict who had been shot, was asked by some one in the camp to look at Campbell. The physician looked at his swollen and diseased foot, and prescribed a disinfectant wash to be applied to the sores. He seems to have been told that there was not much the matter with Campbell, and gave him a very perfunctory examination. He says that he had a very bad foot, was very much emaciated, and for all that he knows might have had typhoid fever. After the 22d of March Campbell got worse, his foot became very offensive, and he was placed...