QUINCE MOSLEY, AND T. E. MOSLEY, PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, DEFENDANT IN ERROR
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a conviction for aggravated assault, holding that the jury's verdict was supported by sufficient evidence and that the appellate court should not disturb the jury's determination of witness credibility.
Yes, the evidence presented was sufficient to support the jury's verdict of guilty for aggravated assault.
“That the crimé was committed and that the boy alleged to have been shot was seriously wounded are not disputed.”
Establishes undisputed facts of the case.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceQuince Mosley and T. E. Mosley were indicted for assault with intent to commit murder. The jury returned a verdict finding them guilty of aggravated a…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Jury'S Role In Determining Credibility cases and more on FLexlaw
West, C. J.
The indictment in this case charges Quince Mosley and T. E. Mosley with assault with intent to commit murder. The verdict found them guilty of aggravated assault.. Writ of error was taken from this court to review the judgment.
By brief counsel for plaintiffs in error concede that the only question presented is the sufficiency of the evidence to support the verdict and judgment.
There is some confusion of witnesses as to details of the alleged encounter, but it is not conceived that there would be compensating benefit from an analysis of the evidence or a recital of material or pertinent parts even of the substance of it. That the crimé was committed and that the boy alleged to have been shot was seriously wounded are not disputed. There is ample evidence, if credited, to prove that the accused fired the shot and under circumstances such as to justify a finding of guilty of aggravated assault. The jury determined the question of credibility of the witnesses and in the absence of a showing that they were influenced by anything other than a proper consideration of the evidence, it is not within the province of this court to disturb their finding. Crawford v. State, 86 Fla. 94, 97 South. Rep. 288; Studstill v. State, 83 Fla. 623, 92 South. Rep. 151; Moore v. State, 83 Fla. 270, 91 South. Rep. 180; Collinsworth v. State, 82 Fla. 291, 89 South. Rep. 802; Kirkland v. State, 82 Fla. 118, 89 South. Rep. 356; Hamlin v. State, 80 Fla. 217, 85 South. Rep. 685; Brown v. State, 79 Fla. 523, 84 South. Rep. 384; Wallace v. State, 76 Fla. 175, 79 South. Rep. 634.
The judgment is affirmed.
Whitfield, Ellis and Terrell, J. J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Tobe Wallace v. State, 76 Fla. 175 (Fla. 1918)
- Hamlin v. State, 80 Fla. 217 (Fla. 1920)
- Arra Brown v. State, 79 Fla. 523 (Fla. 1920)
- Collinsworth v. State, 82 Fla. 291 (Fla. 1921)
- Moore v. State, 83 Fla. 270 (Fla. 1922)
- Donovan Studstill and John Lee Studstill v. State, 83 Fla. 623 (Fla. 1922)
- Smith v. Blanche D. Rentz, 82 Fla. 118 (Fla. 1921)
- Kirkland v. State, 82 Fla. 118 (Fla. 1921)
- Crawford v. State, 86 Fla. 94 (Fla. 1923)