Pappas v. State
This text of 110 So. 65 (Pappas 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.
Opinion
Plaintiffs in error were indicted, tried and convicted in the Criminal Court of Record of Hills-borough County, for receiving and concealing stolen property, knowing it to be stolen. They were sentenced to imprisonment in the State Penitentiary for a term of one year and seek to be relieved of this judgment on writ of error.
The assignments of error are numerous and challenge the excusing of certain jurors for cause, permitting certain counsel to question the witnesses, introduction and rejection of evidence, motion for severance as to defendant Zahas, refusal to hear evidence on defendants’ motion for continuance, refusal of motion for directed verdict as to defendants and the refusal of instructions requésted in behalf of defendants.
All assignments have been thoroughly presented and we have examined the basis of each carefully. To elaborate on them would require a lengthy opinion that would serve no useful purpose since the questions raised have been frequently settled in previous adjudications of this Court. Some irregularities were doubtless committed in the trial, but on the whole showing made we are unable to say that the trial court abused his discretion or that prejudicial error was committed. The evidence amply supports the verdict, and the judgment is affirmed.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
110 So. 65, 92 Fla. 997, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pappas-v-state-fla-1926.