Case Name: Howard Hood and Randolph Hood, Plaintiffs in Error, v. State of Florida, Defendant in Error
Court: Florida Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1928-04-21
Citations: 95 Fla. 767
Docket Number: 
Parties: Howard Hood and Randolph Hood, Plaintiffs in Error, v. State of Florida, Defendant in Error.
Judges: Whitfield, P. J., and Terrell, J., concur.
Reporter: Florida Reports
Volume: 95
Pages: 767–767

Head Matter:
Howard Hood and Randolph Hood, Plaintiffs in Error, v. State of Florida, Defendant in Error.
Division B.
Opinion Filed April 21, 1928.
Purl G. Adams, Attorney for Plaintiff in Error;
Fred H. Davis, Attorney General, and Boy Campbell, Assistant, Attorneys for Defendant in Error.

Opinion:
Buford, J.
In this case the State was allowed to introduce evidence over the objection of defendants tending to prove a crime other than that charged in the indictment and for which the defendants were then on trial.
The entire evidence, when taken together, scarcely meets the requirements of evidence sufficient to convict and it is our opinion that the irrelevant testimony above referred to was prejudicial to the defendants.
The ease should be reversed on authority of the opinion in the case of Boyette v. the State, filed in this Court March 28, 1928, and it is so ordered. See also Nickels v. State, 106 Sou. Rep. 479.
Reversed.
Whitfield, P. J., and Terrell, J., concur.
Ellis, C. J., and Strum and Brown, J. J., concur in the opinion and judgment.