Reichard v. State

Supreme Court of Florida

Reichard v. State

191 So. 829, 140 Fla. 469, 1939 Fla. LEXIS 1130

DecidedNovember 10, 1939

StatusPublished

This text of 191 So. 829 (Reichard 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

Reichard v. State, 191 So. 829, 140 Fla. 469, 1939 Fla. LEXIS 1130 (Fla. 1939).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam. —

Plaintiff in error was indicted, tried, and convicted of manslaughter. He was sentenced to five years in the State penitentiary and seeks relief from that judgment by writ of error.

*470 The only error relied • on for reversal is the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the verdict and judgment.

The evidence has been examined and while it is in part circumstantial, it is ample to support the verdict. It shows that the deceased was well into her sixties, that she was in delicate health, being anemic and having a bad heart and that plaintiff in error kicked and choked her. This evidence was supported by a succession of aggravated events in close succession from all of which death took place an hour or two after she was kicked and choked. On the whole, a flagrant abuse of the deceased is shown by the plaintiff in error from which the jury may reasonably have concluded that death ensued.

The judgment is affirmed.

Terrell, C. J., and Buford and Thomas, J. J., concur. ■ Chapman, J., concurs in opinion and judgment. Justices Whitfield and Brown not participating as authorized by Section 4687, Compiled General Laws of 1927, and Rule 21-A of the Rules of this Court.

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

Per Curiam. —

Plaintiff in error was indicted, tried, and convicted of manslaughter. He was sentenced to five years in the State penitentiary and seeks relief from that judgment by writ of error.

*470 The only error relied • on for reversal is the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the verdict and judgment.

The evidence has been examined and while it is in part circumstantial, it is ample to support the verdict. It shows that the deceased was well into her sixties, that she was in delicate health, being anemic and having a bad heart and that plaintiff in error kicked and choked her. This evidence was supported by a succession of aggravated events in close succession from all of which death took place an hour or two after she was kicked and choked. On the whole, a flagrant abuse of the deceased is shown by the plaintiff in error from which the jury may reasonably have concluded that death ensued.

The judgment is affirmed.

Terrell, C. J., and Buford and Thomas, J. J., concur. ■ Chapman, J., concurs in opinion and judgment. Justices Whitfield and Brown not participating as authorized by Section 4687, Compiled General Laws of 1927, and Rule 21-A of the Rules of this Court.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

191 So. 829, 140 Fla. 469, 1939 Fla. LEXIS 1130, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reichard-v-state-fla-1939.