Messer v. State
| Decision Date | 25 April 1918 |
| Citation | 75 Fla. 619,78 So. 680 |
| Parties | MESSER v. STATE. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Error to Circuit Court, Jackson County; C. L. Wilson, Judge.
E. B Messer was convicted of murder in the second degree, and he brings error. Affirmed.
Syllabus by the Court
The rule is that, while the legal effect of evidence or the lack of evidence in its relation to a verdict rendered in a trial may by appropriate proceedings be reviewed by an appellate court, yet conflicts in competent testimony, the weight of legal evidence, and the credibility of competent witnesses are primarily for the determination of the jury, and where there is some substantial competent evidence of all the facts legally essential to support the verdict, and there is nothing in the record to indicate that the jury was not governed by the evidence, a refusal of the trial court to grant a new trial on the ground of the insufficiency of the evidence to sustain the verdict will not be disturbed by the appellate court.
COUNSEL Ellis F. Davis, of Marianna, for plaintiff in error.
Van C Swearingen, Atty. Gen., and C. O. Andrews, Asst. Atty. Gen for the State.
The plaintiff in error, hereinafter for convenience referred to as the defendant, was indicted in the circuit court of Jackson county upon a charge of murder in the first degree. The person alleged to have been murdered by him was Ella Fare Messer, his wife.
He was tried, found guilty of murder in the second degree, adjudged by the court to be guilty, and sentenced to be confined in the state prison for the term of his natural life.
To review this judgment writ of error was taken from this court.
The only assignment of error is that the trial court erred in overruling defendant's motion for a new trial, and the only grounds of this motion which are insisted upon and argued in the brief of counsel for the defendant are the seventh and eighth, which question the sufficiency of the evidence to support the verdict, and allege that the verdict is contrary to the law and the charge of the court, so that the case is in small compass here.
From the evidence it appears that the defendant was punishing a stepdaughter, who was a daughter of the deceased, for sme alleged misconduct, and that the deceased intervened, taking the part of her daughter, which seemed rather to intensify the feeling between them and prompt the daughter to resist that a combat between the defendant, on the one hand, and the daughter and the deceased, on the other, ensued, in which the combatants were armed with sticks of a variety of sizes and dimensions, the deceased, however, appearing throughout to act rather in defense of her daughter and to encourage her in her resistance and hostility than to herself have made any attack upon the defendant, although it is undisputed that as she approached the scene of the encounter she was armed with a stick.
The result was that the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
May v. State
... ... to review. Collinsworth v. State, 82 Fla. 291, 89 ... So. 802; Kirkland v. State, 82 Fla. 119, 89 So. 356; ... Hamlin v. State, 80 Fla. 217, 85 So. 685; Brown ... v. State, 79 Fla. 523, 84 So. 384; Wallace v ... State, 76 Fla. 175, 79 So. 634; Messer v ... State, 75 Fla. 619, 78 So. 680; McCoy v. State, ... 75 Fla. 294, 78 So. 168 ... The ... time allowed by the court for argument was limited to 20 ... minutes. Error is assigned upon this ruling, and it is urged ... here that the limitation of the argument of counsel to 20 ... ...
-
Miller v. State
... ... legally essential to support the verdict, and there is ... nothing in the record to show that the jury were influenced ... by considerations outside the evidence. We will therefore not ... disturb it. Wallace v. State, 79 So. 634; Messer ... v. State, 78 So. 680; McCoy v. State, 78 So ... 168; Herndon v. State, 73 Fla. 451, 74 So. 511; ... Barrentine v. State, 72 Fla. 1, 72 So. 280; ... McClellan v. State, 66 Fla. 215, 63 So. 419 ... The ... judgment must be affirmed ... WHITFIELD ... and ELLIS, JJ., ... ...
-
Studstill v. State
... ... Moore ... v. State (Fla.) 91 So. 180; Collinsworth v. State ... (Fla.) 89 So. 802; Kirkland v. State (Fla.) 89 ... So. 356; Hamlin v. State, 80 Fla. 217, 85 So. 685; ... Brown v. State, 79 Fla. 523, 84 So. 384; Wallace ... v. State, 76 Fla. 175, 79 So. 634; Messer v ... State, 75 Fla. 619, 78 So. 680; McCoy v. State, ... 75 Fla. 294, 78 So. 168 ... What we ... have said disposes of the case. Other questions relative to ... the admission or exclusion of evidence do not require ... consideration ... [83 ... Fla. 628] No harmful ... ...
-
Moore v. State
... ... influenced by considerations outside the evidence ... Collinsworth v. State, 82 Fla. ----, 89 So. 802; ... Kirkland v. State (Fla.) 89 So. 356; Hamlin v ... State, 80 Fla. 217, 85 So. 685; Brown v. State, ... 79 Fla. 523, 84 So. 384; Wallace v. State, 76 Fla ... 175, 79 So. 634; Messer v. State, 75 Fla. 619, 78 ... So. 680; McCoy v. State, 75 Fla. 294, 78 So. 168 ... The ... other question is based upon an assignment which questions ... the ruling of the trial court refusing a requested charge on ... behalf of defendants. Considering the whole of the ... ...