Case Name: Lonnie Roland, Alias Lonnie Roling, Plaintiff in Error, v. The State of Florida, Defendant in Error
Court: Florida Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1914-11-06
Citations: 68 Fla. 153
Docket Number: 
Parties: Lonnie Roland, Alias Lonnie Roling, Plaintiff in Error, v. The State of Florida, Defendant in Error.
Judges: Taylor, Cockrell, Hocker, and Whitfield, J. J., concur.
Reporter: Florida Reports
Volume: 68
Pages: 153–154

Head Matter:
Lonnie Roland, Alias Lonnie Roling, Plaintiff in Error, v. The State of Florida, Defendant in Error.
Opinion Filed November 6, 1914.
When tlie trial court concurs in the verdict rendered by a jury by denying the motion for a new trial, and there is evidence to support it, appellate courts should refuse to disturb it, in the absence of any showing that the jurors must have been improperly influenced by considerations outside of the evidence.
Writ of error to Circuit Court for Duval County; Geo. Couper Gibbs, Judge.
Judgment affirmed.
Francis P. UEngle, for Plaintiff in Error;
T. F. West, Attorney General, and G. O. Andrews, Assistant, for the State.

Opinion:
Shackleford, C. J.
Lonnie Roland, alias Lonnie Roling, was tried and convicted of tbe crime of murder in the first degree.
Three errors are assigned, all of which are based upon the overruling of the motion for a new trial, and all question the sufficiency of the evidence to support the verdict. It would be a fruitless task to set out the evidence. Suffice it to say that we have carefully read all the evidence adduced and are clear that it is amply sufficient to support the verdict, and we are of the opinion that the trial judge was fully warranted in overruling the motion. We must concur with him in refusing to disturb the verdict. See Bexley v. State, 59 Fla. 6, 51 South. Rep. 278.
Judgment affirmed.
Taylor, Cockrell, Hocker, and Whitfield, J. J., concur.