Case ID: fla_160/html/0652-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM: TERRELL, J.,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

E. BERT RIDDLE v. STATE OF FLORIDA
    36 So. (2nd) 172
    June 29, 1948
    Rehearing denied July 15, 1948
    June Term, 1948
    En Banc
    
      John M. Coe, for appellant.
    
      J. Tom Watson, Attorney General, and Reeves Bowen, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.
   PER CURIAM:

Affirmed.

THOMAS, C. J., SEBRING, BARNS and HOBSON, JJ., concur.

TERRELL and CHAPMAN, JJ., dissent.

ADAMS, J., not participating.

TERRELL, J.,

dissenting:

I think the evidence in this case is legally insufficient to support the conviction. Considered in sum, I think it is more consistent with a frame-up on the defendant than it is with his guilt. It is far short of showing a “lewd” attempt to “fondle” the prosecutrix, and, while on trial for a felony with a sex aspect, it is about to condemn defendant to infamy and dishonor I am convinced that it would not be sufficient to condemn him for chicken stealing, a trial for which would be governed by the same rules of evidence.

Having received such a reaction from the record impels me to dissent. I am authorized to say that Mr. Justice CHAPMAN agrees to this conclusion.

CHAPMAN, J., concurs.