JOE STANSEL
v.
STATE
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 manslaughter, holding that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict, despite the defendant's claim that the verdict was contrary to the evidence and law.
Yes, the evidence was amply sufficient to sustain the verdict of murder in the first degree, and therefore, it supports the verdict and judgment of manslaughter.
“The appeal brings for review judgment of conviction of manslaughter under an indictment charging murder in the first degree.”
Describes the nature of the appeal and the original charge.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe defendant was convicted of manslaughter under an indictment for first-degree murder. The defendant's sole assignment of error was the trial court'…
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 Verdict Contrary To Evidence cases and more on FLexlaw
The appeal brings for review judgment of conviction of manslaughter under an indictment charging murder in the first degree.
The only assignment of error is that the trial court overruled motion for new trial. The motion for new trial contains three grounds, as follows:
“1st. Because the verdict of the jury is contrary to the evidence.
“2nd. Because the verdict of the jury is not supported by the evidence.
“3rd. Because the verdict of the jury is contrary to the law and the evidence.”
*503Plaintiff in error contends that the evidence is not sufficient to sustain the verdict. The evidence was amply sufficient to sustain the verdict of murder in the first degree and, therefore, it supports the verdict and judgment.
Judgment affirmed.
So ordered.
Ellis, P. J., and Terrell and Buford, J. J., concur.
Whitfield, C. J., and Brown and Davis, J. J., concur in the opinion and judgment.