Johnston v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Johnston v. State

257 So. 2d 94, 1972 Fla. App. LEXIS 7338

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 1, 1972

DocketNo. 71-943

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 257 So. 2d 94 (Johnston v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Johnston v. State, 257 So. 2d 94, 1972 Fla. App. LEXIS 7338 (Fla. Ct. App. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal by the defendant below from judgment of conviction based on a jury verdict, for the offense of larceny of a motor vehicle. Upon consideration of the contentions of the appellant, in the light of the record and briefs, we conclude no reversible error has been made to appear. The ruling by the trial court that the inculpatory statement of the defendant which was received in evidence was voluntarily made was not error. Although the evidence relating thereto was not without conflict, the trial court was entitled to conclude therefrom that the voluntariness of the statement was established by the preponderance of the evidence relating thereto. Dawson v. State, Fla.1962, 139 So.2d 408; Moffet v. State, Fla.App.1965, 179 So.2d 408. In addition to the admissions made by the defendant, the evidence showed unexplained possession by the defendant of the recently stolen property (automobile). The appellant’s contention that the verdict was not properly determined to be the unanimous verdict of the jury is not supported by the record.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal by the defendant below from judgment of conviction based on a jury verdict, for the offense of larceny of a motor vehicle. Upon consideration of the contentions of the appellant, in the light of the record and briefs, we conclude no reversible error has been made to appear. The ruling by the trial court that the inculpatory statement of the defendant which was received in evidence was voluntarily made was not error. Although the evidence relating thereto was not without conflict, the trial court was entitled to conclude therefrom that the voluntariness of the statement was established by the preponderance of the evidence relating thereto. Dawson v. State, Fla.1962, 139 So.2d 408; Moffet v. State, Fla.App.1965, 179 So.2d 408. In addition to the admissions made by the defendant, the evidence showed unexplained possession by the defendant of the recently stolen property (automobile). The appellant’s contention that the verdict was not properly determined to be the unanimous verdict of the jury is not supported by the record.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

257 So. 2d 94, 1972 Fla. App. LEXIS 7338, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/johnston-v-state-fladistctapp-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack