Taylor v. State

98 So. 77, 86 Fla. 360
CourtSupreme Court of Florida
DecidedNovember 5, 1923
StatusPublished

This text of 98 So. 77 (Taylor 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
Taylor v. State, 98 So. 77, 86 Fla. 360 (Fla. 1923).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Upon a trial of the issue made by plea of not guilty to the indictment charging murder in the first degree there was a verdict finding defendant guilty of murder in the second degree. Writ of error was taken from this court.

No question is presented or argued in the brief except the sufficiency of the evidence to .sustain the verdict. None other was mentioned in the oral argument of the case.

Though conflicting in some respects, there is in the record evidence sufficient to sustain the conviction. The judg[361]*361mart is, therefore, affirmed on authority of Newman v. State, 84 Fla. 455, 94 South. Rep. 154; Streety v. State, 85, Fla. 387, 96 South. Rep. 160.

So ordered.

Whitfield, P. J., and West and Terrell, J. J., concur. Taylor, C. J., and Ellis and Browne, J. J., concur in the opinion.

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

Related

Newman v. State
94 So. 154 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1922)
Streety v. State
96 So. 160 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1923)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
98 So. 77, 86 Fla. 360, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/taylor-v-state-fla-1923.