Franklin v. State
| Decision Date | 28 October 1913 |
| Citation | 63 So. 418,66 Fla. 213 |
| Parties | FRANKLIN v. STATE. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Error to Criminal Court of Record, Duval County; John S. Maxwell Judge.
George Franklin was convicted of receiving stolen goods, and brings error.Reversed.
Syllabus by the Court
It is essential to a conviction for receiving stolen property that the receiver shall have knowledge that the property was stolen at the time of its reception, or of such circumstances as would put a man of ordinary intelligence and caution on inquiry.
Where a particular fact is an essential element in the commission of a crime, and in a prosecution for such a crime there is no evidence showing the essential fact, and no evidence from which the existence of such essential fact may fairly be inferred, a verdict of guilty of the crime of which such nonproven fact is an essential part may be set aside by an appellate court.
In a prosecution for receiving stolen goods knowing them to have been stolen, where there is nothing in the evidence tending to show the defendant knew the goods were stolem, and no evidence that reasonably should have put him upon inquiry, a verdict of guilty is unauthorized by law.
COUNSELLionel F. Brothers, of Jacksonville, for plaintiff in error.
T. F. West, Atty. Gen., and C. O. Andrews, Asst Atty. Gen., for the state.
Franklin was convicted of receiving stolen goods knowing them to have been stolen, and took writ of error.
It is essential to a conviction for receiving stolen property that the receiver shall have knowledge that the property was stolen at the time of its reception, or of such circumstances as would put a man of ordinary intelligence and caution on inquiry.Minor v. State,55 Fla. 90, 45 So. 818.
Where a particular fact is an essential element in the commission of a crime, and in a prosecution for such a crime there is no evidence showing the essential fact, and no evidence from which the existence of such essential fact may fairly be inferred, a verdict of guilty of the crime of which such nonproven fact is an essential part may be set aside by an appellate court.SeeMcDonald v. State,56 Fla. 7447 So. 485;Baker v. State,54 Fla. 12, 44 So. 719.
The uncontradicted evidence shows that about dark Saturday night the defendant, Franklin, reluctantly allowed boxes of goods to be put in his store by a person who asked that they be allowed to remain...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 7-day Trial
-
Taylor v. State, 70--403
...was stolen. On this record his acquittal of the former offense and conviction of the latter were inconsistent. In Franklin v. State, 66 Fla. 213, 63 So. 418, 419, the Supreme Court 'It is essential to a conviction for receiving stolen property that the receiver shall have knowledge that the......
-
Tidwell v. State
...and caution on inquiry.' Broxson v. State, 99 Fla. 1187, 128 So. 628, 629. See Winton v. State, 87 Fla. 104, 99 So. 249; Franklin v. State, 66 Fla. 213, 63 So. 418. In case of Revels v. State, 68 Fla. 74, 66 So. 422, 423, it was said: ' In Bellamy v. State, 35 Fla. 242, 17 So. 560, we held ......
-
Hamilton v. State
... ... receiving, or aiding in the concealment of said money, goods, ... or property that the same was stolen, or being apprised of ... circumstances that would put a man of ordinary intelligence ... on inquiry as to the stolen character of the money, goods, or ... property. Franklin v. State, 66 Fla. 213, 63 So ... 418; Winton v. State, 87 Fla. 104, 99 So. 249; ... Hart v. State, 92 Fla. 809, 110 So. 253 ... We ... think the information, while inartfully drawn, is sufficient ... to satisfy the rules laid down above. It charges that the ... property had before ... ...
-
Licata v. State
... ... statute (section 5138, Rev. Gen. Stats. Fla. 1921) is ... 'knowing the same to have been stolen.' Knowledge of ... the theft by the accused at the time of his reception of the ... stolen goods must be alleged and proved before a conviction ... upon such a charge can be upheld. Franklin v. State, ... 66 Fla. 213, 63 So. 418; Minor v. State, 55 Fla. 90, ... 45 So. 818. And a verdict in which an attempt is made to set ... out the elements of the crime of which an accused is ... convicted which contains no finding upon an essential element ... of the offense is not sufficient ... ...