Shuler v. State

• Court: Florida Supreme Court
• Writing for the Court: PER CURIAM.
• Citation: Shuler v. State, 84 Fla. 414, 93 So. 672 (Fla. 1922)
• Decision Date: 19 August 1922
• Parties: SHULER v. STATE.

93 So. 672

84 Fla. 414

SHULER v. STATE.

Florida Supreme Court

August 19, 1922

Error to Circuit Court, Jackson County; C. L. Wilson, Judge.

Proceedings between T. W. Shuler and the State. From the judgment rendered, the former brings error.

Affirmed.

Syllabus by the Court

SYLLABUS

Unless errors of trial court injuriously affect substantial rights of complaining party, judgment not disturbed; unless judgment unsupported by any evidence or clearly contrary thereto, it will not be disturbed. The judgment should not be reversed or a new trial granted in any case, civil or criminal, for errors in rulings upon 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 the jury were not governed by the evidence in making their finding.

COUNSEL

Smith & Davis and Amos L. Lewis, all of Marianna for plaintiff in error.

Rivers Buford, Atty. Gen., Marvin C. McIntosh, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Carter, Campbell & Carter and Paul Carter, all of Marianna for the State.

OPINION

PER CURIAM.

On the authority 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; Reeves v. State, 68 Fla. 96, 66 So. 432; Johnson v. State, 80 Fla. 61, 85 So. 155, 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 pratice, 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...