Jackson v. State
| Decision Date | 06 September 1961 |
| Docket Number | No. 40090,40090 |
| Citation | 132 So.2d 596 |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
| Parties | Herman JACKSON, Jr., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
I. C. Smith, West Palm Beach, for appellant.
Richard W. Ervin, Atty. Gen., and B. Clarke Nichols, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
This is a direct appeal from a judgment of guilt of the crime of rape and sentence of death imposed by the circuit court of Palm Beach County. The evidence shows that on February 26, 1960 shortly before 8:00 P.M. the prosecutrix, a 13 year old white girl, was forcibly taken from a roadside telephone booth near her home in Lake Worth, Florida, by a Negro man. The man then dragged her across a highway into a clump of bushes where he raped her.
Approximately one week after this alleged incident, the appellant was arrested and charged with the crime of rape. It is undisputed that following his arrest two officers investigating the offense requested from the appellant permission to search his room in the home of his parents-in-law in West Palm Beach. The investigators testified that he consented to such a search, while the appellant swore that he did not. The search was conducted and certain items of the appellant's clothing as well as a pair of shoes and a wrist watch were seized.
Prior to trial, counsel for appellant filed a motion to suppress the evidence obtained as a result of the search and a hearing was held for the purpose of determining whether the belongings of the appellant were the fruits of an illegal search. The circuit judge decided this disputed question of fact in favor of the prosecution and denied the motion to suppress.
Appellant first contends that the denial of the motion to suppress and the subsequent admission of the disputed items into evidence at the trial constituted reversible error. It is well settled that when a defendant freely and voluntarily consents to a search, such search is not illegal and the fruits thereof are admissible as evidence. 29 Fla.Jur., Search and Seizure, § 38, and authorities cited therein.
Appellant urges, however, that because of the fundamental nature of the rights involved the consent should be required to be in writing. This contention is unsupported by the law of this state, and it would be beyond the legitimate province of this court to evulgate such a rule by judicial fiat. The court below had before it ample evidence upon which to base its finding that the search in question was made pursuant to the consent of the appellant. Accordingly we find no merit in this point.
Appellant next contends that there is insufficient evidence to sustain the verdict of guilty, especially upon the crucial issue of the idenitty of the defendant. We have carefully reviewed the record and find that the evidence militates against upholding this contention. The prosecutrix positively identified the defendant as her assailant. She was also able to identify the defendant's wrist watch and the coat that he was wearing on the night in question. Plaster casts of foot prints found at the telephone booth and at the scene of the crime were identified by an expert as having been made by the same size and type of shoe which the defendant, according to the evidence, was wearing at the time of the offense. Fibers found clinging to a bush at the scene of the crime were identified as bing the same type material, color and length as fibers taken from the coat which the defendant was wearing. Seminal stains and traces of human blood were found on clothing worn by the defendant. There was testimony, albeit not of the most convincing character, by a cell mate of the appellant that prior to trial the appellant had admitted raping the girl. The testimony of appellant's father placed appellant within a few blocks of the scene of the crime on the afternoon of February 26. Finally, the appellant's own testimony, in which he in effect denied any connection with the rape, nevertheless shows that he was within a few hundred feet of the scene of the crime at about the time of its commission.
In the face of this evidence it is clear that the question of the guilt of the appellant was properly a matter for the jury to determine and that the interests of justice do not require a new trial. Section 924.32 (2), F.S.A.
Following the verdict of guilty, appellant filed a motion for a new trial on the basis of newly discovered evidence. In support of his motion appellant's counsel filed an affidavit in which he alleged that subsequent to the trial he learned that one Alta Elberty was an eye witness who could testify that she observed a part of the events leading up to the alleged crime of rape, that she clearly saw the alleged assailant, and that her description of the assailant does not match the physical...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Grimes v. State
...recognized that when a consent to search is voluntarily given the fruits of that search are admissible in evidence. See Jackson v. State, 132 So.2d 596 (Fla.1961). There is no evidence that any coercion or pressure was applied to obtain this consent. The mere fact that Defendant was under a......
-
Elsleger v. State, 4-86-1026
...3 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986). In Jordan, this court stated: A search is valid if consent thereto is freely and voluntarily given. Jackson v. State, 132 So.2d 596 (Fla.1961). When the state relies upon consent to validate a warrantless search, the quality of proof required is clear and convincing e......
-
Brown v. State
...and consented to the request of the arresting officer to 'look around the house.' The test, as set forth by this Court in Jackson v. State, 132 So.2d 596 (Fla.1961), requiring a consent to search to be freely and voluntarily made, has been met. The fact that Grimes was under arrest and in c......
-
Padron v. State, 74--225
...to have been voluntarily given. In order for a consent to search to be effective, it must be freely and voluntarily given, Jackson v. State, 132 So.2d 596 (Fla.1961); Garcia v. State, 186 So.2d 556 (Fla.App.3rd 1966), and the evidence that it was so given must be clear and convincing. Sagon......