Shaw v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Shaw v. State

108 So. 2d 766

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 8, 1959

DocketNo. 58-136

StatusPublished

This text of 108 So. 2d 766 (Shaw 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

Shaw v. State, 108 So. 2d 766 (Fla. Ct. App. 1959).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

From a judgment o,f conviction for the offense of grand larceny this appeal was taken. This court, after having examined the record and briefs and having heard argument of counsel, has concluded that in the light of the evidence adduced and the rulings of the trial court, no reversible error has been made to appear.

The conviction was based on circumstantial evidence. Without stating and reviewing the evidence, which we feel would serve no useful purpose, we have concluded that the evidence presented at the trial adequately supported the verdict and was sufficient to meet the requirement for circumstantial evidence that it be consistent with guilt of the accused and be inconsistent with his innocence. See Chason v. State, 148 Fla. 540, 4 So.2d 691.

The judgment appealed from is hereby affirmed.

CARROLL, CHAS., C. J., and HORTON and PEARSON, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

From a judgment o,f conviction for the offense of grand larceny this appeal was taken. This court, after having examined the record and briefs and having heard argument of counsel, has concluded that in the light of the evidence adduced and the rulings of the trial court, no reversible error has been made to appear.

The conviction was based on circumstantial evidence. Without stating and reviewing the evidence, which we feel would serve no useful purpose, we have concluded that the evidence presented at the trial adequately supported the verdict and was sufficient to meet the requirement for circumstantial evidence that it be consistent with guilt of the accused and be inconsistent with his innocence. See Chason v. State, 148 Fla. 540, 4 So.2d 691.

The judgment appealed from is hereby affirmed.

CARROLL, CHAS., C. J., and HORTON and PEARSON, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

108 So. 2d 766, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shaw-v-state-fladistctapp-1959.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack