TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Holmes v. State

Holmes v. State, 181 So. 2d 586 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1965)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
District Court of Appeal of Florida · State Appellate Courts
Decided
December 14, 1965
Docket
No. 65-148
Judges
Tillman Pearson, Barkdull and Swann
Citations
181 So. 2d 586
Cited by 7

Opinion

181 So.2d 586 (1965)

Milton HOLMES, Appellant,

v.

STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 65-148.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.

December 14, 1965. Rehearing Denied January 26, 1966.

Eli Breger, Miami, for appellant.

Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., and James T. Carlisle and Arden M. Siegendorf, Asst. Attys. Gen., for appellee.

Before TILLMAN PEARSON, BARKDULL and SWANN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

By this appeal, the defendant seeks review of a jury verdict and judgment thereon finding him guilty of leaving the scene of an accident which resulted in the death of a small child. Upon appeal, the appellant urges error in the introduction of certain photographs of his automobile, contending that same were introduced solely for the purpose of prejudicing or inflaming the minds of the jurors; and, secondly, that the court erred in not instructing the jury as to the penalty for the crime informed against, citing § 918.10(1), Fla. Stat., F.S.A. We find no error and affirm.

The photographs were properly identified. The reasonable inference from the evidence was that they were of the defendant's automobile, and the appellant has cited us no authority that their introduction constituted error. The Supreme Court of Florida has specifically held that notwithstanding the language of § 918.10 (1), Fla. Stat., F.S.A., it is not mandatory on the trial court to give instructions as to the penalty. See: Cason v. State, 159 Fla. 294 , 31 So.2d 274 ; Simmons v. State, 160 Fla. 626 , 36 So.2d 207 . Particularly is this so when no such instruction was requested by the defendant. See: White v. State, *587 Fla.App. 1960, 122 So.2d 340 ; Peel v. State, Fla.App. 1963, 154 So.2d 910 .

Therefore, the conviction, judgment and sentence here under review be and the same is hereby affirmed.

Affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 7 cases

View all citing references →
1967: 11971: 11974: 21978: 11980: 11987: 119672026peak 1974 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. State v. Muentner406 N.W.2d 415 (Wis. 1987)
  2. Johnson v. State308 So. 2d 38 (Fla. 1974)
  3. Tascano v. State363 So. 2d 405 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1978)
  4. Williams v. State378 So. 2d 902 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1980)
  5. Johnson v. State297 So. 2d 35 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1974)
  6. McBride v. State197 So. 2d 850 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1967)

Most recent

  1. State v. Muentner406 N.W.2d 415 (Wis. 1987)
  2. Williams v. State378 So. 2d 902 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1980)
  3. Tascano v. State363 So. 2d 405 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1978)
  4. Johnson v. State308 So. 2d 38 (Fla. 1974)
  5. Johnson v. State297 So. 2d 35 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1974)
  6. Conner v. State253 So. 2d 160 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1971)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 4

DepthCaseCited by
Simmons v. State, 36 So. 2d 207 (Fla. 1948) 39
Cason v. State, 31 So. 2d 274 (Fla. 1947) 2
Peel v. State, 154 So. 2d 910 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1963) 21
White v. State, 122 So. 2d 340 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1960) 3

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list