Smith v. State of Florida

116 So. 642, 95 Fla. 821
CourtSupreme Court of Florida
DecidedApril 26, 1928
StatusPublished

This text of 116 So. 642 (Smith v. State of Florida) 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
Smith v. State of Florida, 116 So. 642, 95 Fla. 821 (Fla. 1928).

Opinion

Terrell, J.

Plaintiff in error was indicted and tried for murder and convicted of manslaughter in the Circuit Court of Escambia County. By writ of error he comes here challenging his conviction. The main question brought up for our consideration is the sufficiency of the evidence to support the verdict. The evidence was circum *822 stantial. We do not think it meets the circumstantial evidence rule prescribed' by this Court in Hall v. State, 90 Fla. 719, 107 Sou. 246 and eases there cited, so the judgment below is reversed and a new trial awarded.

Reversed.

Whitfield, P. J., and Buford, J., concur. Ellis, C. J., and Strum and Brown, J. J., concur in the opinion and judgment.

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

Related

Hall v. State
107 So. 246 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1925)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
116 So. 642, 95 Fla. 821, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-v-state-of-florida-fla-1928.