History
  • No items yet
midpage
Brown v. State
127 Fla. 225
Fla.
1937
Check Treatment

The writ of error brings for review conviction of the offense of larceny of certain cattle described as "four cows marked crop split under bit in one ear, swallow fork in other ear and branded JE, a better and more particular description of said four cows being to affiant unknown." *Page 226

The State relied in part upon circumstantial evidence for a conviction of the accused in this case. Without the circumstantial evidence there was not sufficient direct evidence upon which to base a conviction. The circumstantial evidence adduced to supplement the direct evidence did not meet the rule that when circumstantial evidence is relied on for a conviction the circumstances proved must be so strong and cogent as to exclude every reasonable hypothesis except the defendant's guilt. All of the circumstances relied upon to supply the deficiency of direct evidence could have been true and yet the accused could have, under a reasonable hypothesis, been innocent of the offense charged. These enunciations are so elementary that it requires no citation of authorities to support either of them.

For the reasons stated, the judgment should be reversed and the cause remanded for a new trial.

It is so ordered.

Reversed and remanded.

ELLIS, C.J., and WHITFIELD, TERRELL, BROWN and DAVIS, J.J., concur.

Case Details

Case Name: Brown v. State
Court Name: Supreme Court of Florida
Date Published: Mar 4, 1937
Citation: 127 Fla. 225
Court Abbreviation: Fla.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.