Foy v. State, (1934)
Court: Supreme Court of Florida
Number:
Visitors: 4
Judges: PER CURIAM. —
Attorneys: John B. Singletary and Frank Redd, for Plaintiff in Error;
Cary D. Landis, Attorney General, and Roy Campbell,
Assistant, for the State.
Filed: Jun. 11, 1934
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: Archie Foy while on trial for the felony of statutory burglary became a witness in his own behalf. While on the stand the Court permitted (over appropriate objections by counsel for defendant) the State Attorney to interrogate the defendant as follows: "And you know at this time you are under indictment with respect to both of these breakings and enterings " The court also permitted over objection of defendant's counsel, the State Attorney to ask of defendant's witness, Clyde Whitted: "Did you k
Summary: Archie Foy while on trial for the felony of statutory burglary became a witness in his own behalf. While on the stand the Court permitted (over appropriate objections by counsel for defendant) the State Attorney to interrogate the defendant as follows: "And you know at this time you are under indictment with respect to both of these breakings and enterings " The court also permitted over objection of defendant's counsel, the State Attorney to ask of defendant's witness, Clyde Whitted: "Did you kn..
More
The Attorney General contends that these questions adverted to in the above opinion were proper under Wallace v. State,41 Fla. 547, 26 So. 713, and Squires v. State, 42 Fla. 251,27 So. 864, but a reading of these cases convinces me that they do not apply here. I concur in the conclusion that the objections to these questions should have been sustained, and that, for these and other reasons going to the sufficiency of the evidence, which I deem it unnecessary to discuss, the judgment should be reversed and the plaintiff in error granted a new trial.
Source: CourtListener
