McMullen v. State

81 So. 223, 77 Fla. 217
Supreme Court of Florida·Decided February 24, 1919·Published

Opinions

Whitfield, J.

— At the trial of plaintiff in error for larceny of hogs, the court excluded, on the ground that it was irrelevant and immaterial, the record in an action of replevin the prosecuting witness had brought to recover the hogs from the defendant, in which action the [218] possession of the Logs was awarded to the defendant. If the defendant was entitled to the hogs,, or if they did not belong to the prosecuting witness as alleged, the defendant could not legally have been convicted on the charge, therefore, the record referred to was both relevant and material to the issue being tried and should have been admitted as against the objections made to it. See Charles v. State, 36 Fla. 691.

Reversed.

Browne, C. J., and Taylor, J., concur. Ellis and West, JJ., dissent.

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

McMullen v. State, 81 So. 223, 77 Fla. 217 (Fla. 1919).

81 So. 223 (McMullen v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Charles v. State
36 Fla. 691 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1895)
People v. Leland
25 N.Y.S. 943 (New York Supreme Court, 1893)
Edwards v. State
69 Ga. 737 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1882)
Tinney v. State
111 Ala. 74 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1895)