Fla. Stat, (1981) - Florida State University College of Law

the prosecutor informed a juror once during voir dire, and once in opening
statement, that an accamplice had been convicted.
both cases.
were permitted to explain in detail the nature of the plea bargain, to express
the fact that Elaine Parker was the formzc wife of the defendant, and that shs
was a potmtial state Witness testifying against the defendant. The court's
instruction (R. 324) was hardly sufficient to erase the prejudice of telling
the jury that the defendant's Tom wife, with whm he was living at the time
of the offense, had made a deal with the state to testify against the defendant
me remedy is a new trial.
Reversal was required in
Here, the error was much mre egregious, because the prosecutors
AFGLJmNT VIII
THE EYIDE2KE WAS INSUFFICIENT To SUSTAIN 24
OF GUILW OF FIFST DEGREE MURDF,R
As To COUNT I a? mE I N D I C ~ .
!the general rule is that, where the only proof of guilt is circumstantial,
no matter hm strongly the evidence may suggest guilt, a conviction cannot be
sustained unless the evidence is inconsistent with any reasonable hypothesis of
innocence. &Arthur v. --
State, 351 So. 2d 972 (Fla. 1977); --
Davis v. State, 90
So. 2d 629 (Fla, 1956); Head v. State, 62 So. 2d 41 (Fla. 1952). A mmllaxy
tc~ this rule is that the defense version of a hdcide must be believed if the
circumstances do not prove that version to be false.
2d 899 (Fla. 1954); MSrthur, supra, at 976, footnote 12. Here, there was m
contention that the defendant himself killed or stabbed the deceased, Rjchard
Padgett. (T. 914)
1.832-1833) .
1636).
--
As to Count I, the undisputed evidence showed:
Mayo - v. State, 71 So.
(1) that Padgett med mney to Graver, not Parker (T. 1141,
(2) that Padgett and Paxker were frieslds (T, 1138)
(3) that there was bad blood between (kcover and Padgett (T. 1138,
Page -51-