From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hart v. State

Supreme Court of Florida, Special Division B
Oct 3, 1952
60 So. 2d 489 (Fla. 1952)

Opinion

August 19, 1952. Rehearing Denied October 3, 1952.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Okaloosa County, D. Stuart Gillis, J.

Thos. D. Beasley, De Funiak Springs, for appellant.

Richard W. Ervin, Atty. Gen., and Leonard Pepper and Boone D. Tillett, Jr., Asst. Attys. Gen., for appellee.


The appellant was tried and convicted on a charge of second degree murder, and has appealed. The sole issue here is whether the evidence was sufficient to sustain his conviction.

The evidence was conflicting, and the conflicts were resolved by the jury against the appellant. The State introduced ample substantial testimony which, if believed by the jury, was sufficient to justify their verdict of murder in the second degree, and which it would serve no useful purpose to relate. The judgment of conviction should, therefore, be affirmed. Holmes v. State, 154 Fla. 409, 17 So.2d 789; Johns v. State, 157 Fla. 18, 24 So.2d 708.

It appears, however, that the judgment of the lower court failed to expressly adjudicate that appellant was guilty of the crime charged. The cause is, therefore, remanded for the purpose of entering a proper judgment; and upon such judgment being entered, the judgment will stand affirmed.

SEBRING, C.J., MATHEWS, J., and FUTCH, Associate Justice, concur.


Summaries of

Hart v. State

Supreme Court of Florida, Special Division B
Oct 3, 1952
60 So. 2d 489 (Fla. 1952)
Case details for

Hart v. State

Case Details

Full title:HART v. STATE

Court:Supreme Court of Florida, Special Division B

Date published: Oct 3, 1952

Citations

60 So. 2d 489 (Fla. 1952)

Citing Cases

Corn v. State

The cause is, therefore, remanded for the purpose of entering a proper judgment; and upon such judgment being…

Ross v. State

The judgment and sentence are complete as they now stand on the record and absolutely no useful purpose could…