Way v. State
| Decision Date | 31 July 1953 |
| Citation | 67 So.2d 321 |
| Parties | WAY et al. v. STATE. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Whit Newberry, Jr., Pensacola, for appellants.
Richard W. Ervin, Atty. Gen., and Bart L. Cohen, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Appellants were charged in the Court of Record of Escambia County with having unlawfully taken, stolen, carried away one outboard motor of the value of $260. In count No. 1 it was alleged that the outboard motor was the property, goods and chattels of one Charles McGraw while in the second count the outboard motor was alleged to be the property, goods and chattels of 'one to your informant unknown, and such unknown owner was a person other than the said Charlie A. Way and Essie Lorraine Way.' Appellants were tried before a jury which rendered a verdict against both of them: 'guilty as charged.' Appellant Charlie Way was sentenced to State Prison for a period of four years and appellant Essie Way was sentenced to the State Prison for a period of two years.
Appellants pose but one question upon this appeal. They contend that the prosecuting attorney in his argument to the jury commented upon the fact that both of the defendants failed to take the witness stand or to offer any evidence in their behalf. They present the following question 'Did the Court err in allowing the County Solicitor to remark upon the fact either directly, indirectly, or by innuendo that the Defendants failed to take the witness stand or offer any evidence in their behalf?'
Counsel for appellants insists that the remarks made by the prosecuting attorney in the instant case amounted either directly or covertly to a comment upon the failure of appellants to take the witness stand and, therefore, Section 918.09, Florida Statutes of 1951, F.S.A., which prohibits a prosecuting attorney from commenting on the failure of an accused to testify in his own behalf was violated.
Counsel relies upon our opinion in Clinton v. State, 56 Fla. 57, 47 So. 389, and upon the Alabama case of Broadway v. State, Ala.App., 60 So.2d 697. From the former of these cases counsel quotes from our opinion [56 Fla. 57, 47 So. 390] as follows:
In this case Mr. Richard P. Warfield, who was attorney for defendants in the court below, objected initially when the county solicitor in his argument to the jury stated 'At the outset, Mr. Warfield gave no explanation of his defense----.'
Mr. Warfield, objected, stating: 'I object to what Mr. Caro said to the Jury.' The court then stated to Mr. Caro, the county solicitor, 'Make no comment on their failure to testify.'
Subsequently, the county solicitor, in his argument, said:
(Italics supplied.)
to which Mr. Warfield objected in the following language: The objection was overruled.
We have little doubt that the average juror would consider the latter statement made by the county solicitor as a direct reference to the fact that Charles Way did not take the witness stand in his own defense. Furthermore, we hold the view that such statement was at least a comment, covertly if not directly, upon the failure of Essie Way to become a witness in her own behalf. Indeed, the State does not contend that the remarks made by the county solicitor did not directly or covertly refer to the failure of the appellants to testify in their own behalf.
It is the State's contention that the rule of law which should be applied in this case is stated in 84 A.L.R. 784 at 791:
'Misconduct of a prosecuting attorney in commenting on the failure of the defendant to testify does not result in a miscarriage of justice warranting a reversal, when the evidence of the defendant's...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
King v. State
...Fla.App., 134 So.2d 502. This court has jurisdiction to review the matter; compare Alkire's Estate, 144 Fla. 606, 198 So. 475; Way v. State, Fla., 67 So.2d 321; Diecidue v. State, Fla., 131 So.2d 7; and Trafficante v. State, Fla., 92 So.2d 811. A careful examination of the record demonstrat......
-
Diecidue v. State, 30913
...* *' (emphasis supplied) it cannot be said 'that the error complained of has (not) resulted in a miscarriage of justice.' Way et al. v. State, Fla., 67 So.2d 321, 323. Moreover such 'stepping aside' can, and we believe in this case did, deny to the petitioner 'the fair and impartial trial g......
-
State v. DiGuilio
...a defendant's failure to testify. Gordon v. State, 104 So.2d 524 (Fla.1958); Trafficante v. State, 92 So.2d 811 (Fla.1957); Way v. State, 67 So.2d 321 (Fla.1953); Rowe v. State, 87 Fla. 17, 98 So. 613 (1924). Prior to Miranda, however, Florida followed the rule that a defendant's silence, w......
-
Singleton v. State
...as being unexplained or uncontradicted, or undenied (overruling prior cases which held such comment to be permissible) 9 Way v. State, Fla.1953, 67 So.2d 321; Trafficante v. State, And three recent cases bespeak the high priority of protection with which the Courts clothe the immunity from ......