Redstone v. State

Supreme Court of Florida

Redstone v. State

156 So. 235, 116 Fla. 2, 1934 Fla. LEXIS 1004

Supreme Court of Florida·Decided July 27, 1934·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The only question presented in this case which appears to have any merit is whether or not the evidence is sufficient to sustain the verdict.

The evidence might have been much stronger and more satisfactory, but we cannot say that there was not substantial evidence establishing the guilt of the accused. The jury deemed it to be so and the trial judge with all the facts and circumstances before him so ruled in passing on motion for new trial. Therefore, the judgment should be affirmed and it. is so ordered.-

Affirmed.

*3 Whitfield, P. J., and Brown and Buford, J. J., concur. Ellis and Terrell, J. J., concur in the opinion and judgment. Davis, C. J., not participating.

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

Per Curiam.

The only question presented in this case which appears to have any merit is whether or not the evidence is sufficient to sustain the verdict.

The evidence might have been much stronger and more satisfactory, but we cannot say that there was not substantial evidence establishing the guilt of the accused. The jury deemed it to be so and the trial judge with all the facts and circumstances before him so ruled in passing on motion for new trial. Therefore, the judgment should be affirmed and it. is so ordered.-

Affirmed.

*3 Whitfield, P. J., and Brown and Buford, J. J., concur. Ellis and Terrell, J. J., concur in the opinion and judgment. Davis, C. J., not participating.

Redstone v. State, 156 So. 235, 116 Fla. 2, 1934 Fla. LEXIS 1004 (Fla. 1934).

Pincite

156 So. 235 (Redstone v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.