Lewis v. State

• Decision Date: 24 October 1922
• Citation: 84 Fla. 466,94 So. 154
• Parties: LEWIS v. STATE.
• Court: Florida Supreme Court

94 So. 154

84 Fla. 466

LEWIS v. STATE.

Florida Supreme Court

October 24, 1922

Error to Circuit Court, Palm Beach County; E. C. Davis, Judge.

J. J Lewis was convicted of an offense, and he brings error.

Affirmed.

Syllabus by the Court

SYLLABUS

Judgment not reversed for error, unless affecting substantial rights of complaining party. No material or harmful errors of law or procedure being made to appear in the record of the trial the judgment herein of conviction of murder in the second degree is affirmed.

Judgment not reversed or new trial granted on ground that verdict not sustained by evidence, unless clearly wrong. A judgment should not be reversed or a new trial granted on the ground that the verdict was not sustained by the evidence, unless it appears that there was no substantial evidence to support the finding, or that upon the whole evidence the verdict is clearly wrong, or that the jury were not governed by the evidence in making their finding.

COUNSEL Blackwell, Donnell & McCracken and C. D. Abbott all of West Palm Beach, for plaintiff in error.

Rivers Buford, Atty. Gen., and Marvin C. McIntosh, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

OPINION

PER CURIAM.

On the authority of Ford v. State, 44 Fla. 421, 33 So. 301 and Davis v. State, 46 Fla. 137, 35 So. 76, as to the plea in abatement, and of Gee v. State, 61 Fla. 22, 54 So. 458, Goff v. State, 60 Fla. 13, 53 So. 327, Owens v. State, 65 Fla. 483, 62 So. 651, Pittman v. State, 82 Fla. 24, 89 So. 336, Dixon v. State, 79 Fla. 586, 84 So. 541, Johnson v. State, 80 Fla. 61, 85 So. 155, Reeves v. State, 68 Fla. 96, 66 So. 432, and other similar decisions, as to harmless errors of procedure, the judgment of conviction herein should be affirmed.

The judgment should not be reversed or a new trial granted in any case, civil or criminal, for errors in rulings upon the admission or rejection of evidence, or for errors in giving or refusing charges, or for errors in any other matter of procedure or practice, unless it shall appear to the court from a consideration of the entire cause that such errors injuriously affect the substantial rights of the complaining party. Nor should a judgment be reversed or a new trial granted on the ground that the verdict is not sustained by the evidence, unless it appears that there was no substantial evidence to support the finding, or that upon the whole evidence the verdict is clearly wrong, or that ...