Dopler v. State

Supreme Court of Florida

Dopler v. State

40 So. 2d 363, 1949 Fla. LEXIS 1369

CourtSupreme Court of Florida

DecidedMay 10, 1949

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 40 So. 2d 363 (Dopler v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Dopler v. State, 40 So. 2d 363, 1949 Fla. LEXIS 1369 (Fla. 1949).

Pincite

Opinion

Delmar R. Dopler was convicted of murder in the second degree, and he appeals.

Judgment reversed, and a new trial awarded. Involved on this appeal is the question of the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the verdict and judgment of murder in the second degree as entered in the Criminal Court of Record of Polk County, Florida. The record discloses that the appellant, Dopler, and family, and the family of Fred Griffin, the deceased, were related. Fred Griffin was killed in the home of appellant Dopler after midnight on the 24th day of November, 1947. The members of the two families had had several drinks, over a period of some three or four hours, prior to the shooting in the Dopler home.

It is not disputed that Fred Griffin, at the time he was killed, was 35 years of age, six feet and three inches tall and weighed approximately 230 pounds, enjoyed good health, and had a reputation of being unreasonable or overbearing when under the influence of whiskey. The appellant, Dopler, at the time of the difficulty, was in bad health — being confined to his bed a considerable portion of the time. He was being treated by a physician for a skin ailment and was 54 years of age. He is shown to be an older man and much smaller than the deceased. The inconclusiveness of the evidence to establish the essentials of the crime of murder in the second degree cannot by this Court be disregarded.

It is established law if, after a full and careful consideration of the entire record, the ends of justice will be best subserved in granting a new trial because of the inconclusiveness of the testimony offered to establish the essential facts necessary to constitute the crime, then, and under these conditions and circumstances, it becomes the duty of this Court to reverse the cause for a new trial. See Lowe v. State, 154 Fla. 730, 19 So.2d 106, and similar cases.

The judgment appealed from is reversed and a new trial awarded.

TERRELL, THOMAS, and BARNS, JJ., concur.

ADAMS, C.J., SEBRING, J., and WHITE, Associate Justice, dissent. *Page 364

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

Delmar R. Dopler was convicted of murder in the second degree, and he appeals.

Judgment reversed, and a new trial awarded. Involved on this appeal is the question of the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the verdict and judgment of murder in the second degree as entered in the Criminal Court of Record of Polk County, Florida. The record discloses that the appellant, Dopler, and family, and the family of Fred Griffin, the deceased, were related. Fred Griffin was killed in the home of appellant Dopler after midnight on the 24th day of November, 1947. The members of the two families had had several drinks, over a period of some three or four hours, prior to the shooting in the Dopler home.

It is not disputed that Fred Griffin, at the time he was killed, was 35 years of age, six feet and three inches tall and weighed approximately 230 pounds, enjoyed good health, and had a reputation of being unreasonable or overbearing when under the influence of whiskey. The appellant, Dopler, at the time of the difficulty, was in bad health — being confined to his bed a considerable portion of the time. He was being treated by a physician for a skin ailment and was 54 years of age. He is shown to be an older man and much smaller than the deceased. The inconclusiveness of the evidence to establish the essentials of the crime of murder in the second degree cannot by this Court be disregarded.

It is established law if, after a full and careful consideration of the entire record, the ends of justice will be best subserved in granting a new trial because of the inconclusiveness of the testimony offered to establish the essential facts necessary to constitute the crime, then, and under these conditions and circumstances, it becomes the duty of this Court to reverse the cause for a new trial. See Lowe v. State, 154 Fla. 730, 19 So.2d 106, and similar cases.

The judgment appealed from is reversed and a new trial awarded.

TERRELL, THOMAS, and BARNS, JJ., concur.

ADAMS, C.J., SEBRING, J., and WHITE, Associate Justice, dissent. *Page 364

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

40 So. 2d 363, 1949 Fla. LEXIS 1369, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dopler-v-state-fla-1949.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack