TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Heath v. State

O. C. Heath, Plaintiff in Error, v. State of Florida, Defendant in Error

Heath v. State, 120 So. 846 (Fla. 1929)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Supreme Court of Florida · State Highest Courts
Decided
March 9, 1929
Judges
Buford, Terrell, Whitfield, Ellis, Brown
Citations
120 So. 84697 Fla. 330

Opinion of the Court — Buford

Buford, J.

In this case the plaintiff in error was convicted under an indictment charging him with the larceny of a red and white pided heifer yearling, an animal of the bovine species.

There was no conflict in the testimony except as to the identity of the animal. There was no evidence of concealment.

One set of witnesses testified positively to the identity of this young animal, which was unmarked, as being the property of Mrs. Tyre. The other set of witnesses testified just as positively identifying the animal as the property of Heath. It appears to us that one set of witnesses was mistaken as to the identity of the animal and, so far as the record shows, such mistake was an honest one.

So far as is disclosed by the record whe'n the evidence was all in the jury at best could only guess which set of witnesses was correct in the identification of the animal. This Court has repeatedly held that a person should not be convicted upon guesswork or suspicion. Human liberty should not be forfeited by conviction under evidence which is not sufficient to convince a fair and impartial mind of the guilt of the accused to a moral certainty and beyond a reasonable doubt.

Because of the unconvincing quality of the evidence in this case, justice demands that the judgment should be reversed and a new trial granted. It is so ordered.

Reversed.

Terrell, C. J., and Whitfield and Ellis, J. J., concur.

Brown, J., concurs in the result.

How later courts describe this case

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

1932: 11935: 11936: 11937: 11939: 11966: 11976: 119322026peak 1932 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Tibbs v. State337 So. 2d 788 (Fla. 1976)
  2. Forehand v. State171 So. 241 (Fla. 1936)
  3. McNeil v. State139 So. 791 (Fla. 1932)
  4. Rivers v. State192 So. 190 (Fla. 1939)
  5. Mathis v. State163 So. 479 (Fla. 1935)
  6. Pella v. State183 So. 2d 278 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1966)

Most recent

  1. Tibbs v. State337 So. 2d 788 (Fla. 1976)
  2. Pella v. State183 So. 2d 278 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1966)
  3. Rivers v. State192 So. 190 (Fla. 1939)
  4. Chastain v. State189 So. 49 (Fla. 1937) · Dissent
  5. Forehand v. State171 So. 241 (Fla. 1936)
  6. Mathis v. State163 So. 479 (Fla. 1935)

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 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

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