Benefield v. State

Supreme Court of Florida

Benefield v. State

165 So. 897, 123 Fla. 1, 1936 Fla. LEXIS 924

Supreme Court of Florida·Decided February 20, 1936·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The writ of error brings for review j’udgment of conviction of the offense of breaking and entering a building with intent to commit a felony, to-wit, with the intent to commit grand larceny.

The only question presented for our determination is whether or not there is sufficient evidence to support the verdict and as the record discloses ample substantial evidence to support the verdict and j'udgment, the j'udgment should be affirmed.

It is so ordered.

Affirmed.

Ellis, P. J., and Terrell and Buford, J. J., concur. *2 Whitfield, C. J., and Davis, J., concur in the opinion and judgment.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam.

The writ of error brings for review j’udgment of conviction of the offense of breaking and entering a building with intent to commit a felony, to-wit, with the intent to commit grand larceny.

The only question presented for our determination is whether or not there is sufficient evidence to support the verdict and as the record discloses ample substantial evidence to support the verdict and j'udgment, the j'udgment should be affirmed.

It is so ordered.

Affirmed.

Ellis, P. J., and Terrell and Buford, J. J., concur. *2 Whitfield, C. J., and Davis, J., concur in the opinion and judgment.

Benefield v. State, 165 So. 897, 123 Fla. 1, 1936 Fla. LEXIS 924 (Fla. 1936).

Pincite

165 So. 897 (Benefield v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.