White v. State

• Court: Florida Supreme Court
• Writing for the Court: PER CURIAM.
• Citation: White v. State, 84 Fla. 677, 95 So. 113 (Fla. 1922)
• Decision Date: 15 December 1922
• Parties: WHITE v. STATE.

95 So. 113

84 Fla. 677

WHITE v. STATE.

Florida Supreme Court

December 15, 1922

Error to Circuit Court, Hillsborough County; F. M. Robles, Judge.

Hattie White, alias Hattie Johnson, was convicted of murder in the second degree, and she brings error.

Affirmed.

Syllabus by the Court

SYLLABUS

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.

The judgment should not be reversed or a new trial granted in any case 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.

A judgment should not 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 W. K. Zewadski, Jr., of Tampa, 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 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, Lewis v. State. 94 So. 154, Breen v. State, 94 So. 383, and Shuler v. State, 93 So. 672, decided at this term, and other similar decisions as to harmless errors of procedure, the judgment of conviction herein should be affirmed.

The evidence is amply sufficient to sustain the verdict of murder in the second degree, and the judgment of conviction rendered upon the verdict was proper.

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...