Lassiter v. State
| Decision Date | 01 August 1929 |
| Parties | LASSITER v. STATE. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Error to Circuit Court, Walton County; A. G. Campbell, Judge.
Wesley Lassiter was convicted of assault with intent to commit manslaughter, and he brings error.
Affirmed.
Syllabus by the Court
Allegation in motion for new trial that certain words were inserted in verdict by judge after verdict was presented in court was not self-proving. Allegation that words 'with intent' were inserted in verdict 'We, the jury, find the defendant guilty of an assault with intent to commit manslaughter' after verdict was presented in court, and before verdict was filed, was not self-proving, and appearance of allegation in motion for new trial was not evidence of existence of such condition as could be considered by appellate court.
S. K. Gillis, of De Funiak Springs, for plaintiff in error.
Fred H Davis, Atty. Gen., and Roy Campbell, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
In this case the plaintiff in error was charged by indictment with the crime of assault with intent to commit murder in the first degree. He pleaded not guilty, and on trial by jury was convicted of the crime of assault with intent to commit manslaughter. He was adjudged to be guilty of such offense and was sentenced to serve a period of 12 months in the state prison.
To the judgment he took writ of error.
An 'assault with intent to commit manslaughter' is an unlawful assault committed in such manner and with means as would have resulted in the commission of the crime of manslaughter if the person assaulted had then and there died from the effects of the assault.
There are two assignments of error. The first is: 'The Court erred in denying the defendant's motion for a new trial.' The second: 'The Court erred in sentencing the plaintiff in error on the verdict as returned by the jury.'
The verdict of the jury as shown by the transcript of the record is as follows:
'We the jury, find the defendant guilty of an assault with intent to commit manslaughter.'
It is the contention of the plaintiff in error that the words 'with intent,' as contained in the verdict, were inserted by the trial judge after the verdict was presented in court and before the verdict was filed. This, however, is not evidenced by the record, and it is a well-settled rule that the allegations contained in a motion are not self-proving. Therefore, the appearance of this allegation in a motion for a new trial is not evidence of the existence of such a condition as could be considered by this court even if the same was material.
We take it that the verdict as it would have read without the words 'with intent' inserted therein would have been entirely sufficient as a basis for a judgment of conviction in this case under the authority of opinion in the case of Richardson v. State, 72 Fla. 154, 72 So. 665, and cases there cited, and in French v. State, decided December 1928, reported 118 So. 815.
The motion for a new trial contains reference to certain charges given by the court which are insisted upon as constituting grounds for...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Rodriguez v. State
...(act voluntarily and intentionally) to commit manslaughter (act involuntarily and unintentionally). See Lassiter v. State, 98 Fla. 370, 373, 123 So. 735 (1929) (Brown, J., dissenting); Taylor v. State, 401 So.2d 812, 816 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981) (Dauksch, C.J., concurring and dissenting); Robins......
-
Neal v. Culver
...felony, the Florida courts have held that, although one may be guilty of assault with intent to commit manslaughter, Lassiter v. State, 98 Fla. 370, 123 So. 735, there is no such thing as assault with intent to commit murder in the second or third degree because inasmuch as those crimes do ......
-
Charlton v. Wainwright, 78-1219
...Devoe v. Tucker, 113 Fla. 805, 152 So. 624, 625 (1934); State ex rel. Brown v. Mayo, 113 Fla. 746, 152 So. 627 (1934); Lassiter v. State, 98 Fla. 370, 123 So. 735 (1929); Kelley v. State, 78 Fla. 636, 83 So. 506 (1919).4 Thomas v. State, 73 Fla. 115, 74 So. 1 (1917); Johnson v. State, 91 So......
-
Taylor v. State, 80-1111
...Devoe v. Tucker, 113 Fla. 805, 152 So. 624 (1934); State ex rel. Brown v. Mayo, 113 Fla. 746, 152 So. 627 (1934); Lassiter v. State, 98 Fla. 370, 123 So. 735 (1929); Kelly v. State, 78 Fla. 636, 83 So. 506 (1919). In Lassiter, Justice Brown, in a dissent, expressed doubt as to the existence......