Case Name: T. W. Shuler, Plaintiff in Error, v. The State of Florida; Defendant in Error
Court: Florida Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1922-08-19
Citations: 84 Fla. 414
Docket Number: 
Parties: T. W. Shuler, Plaintiff in Error, v. The State of Florida; Defendant in Error.
Judges: Browne, C. J., and Taylor, Whitfield, Ellis and West, J. J., concur.
Reporter: Florida Reports
Volume: 84
Pages: 414–416

Head Matter:
T. W. Shuler, Plaintiff in Error, v. The State of Florida; Defendant in Error.
Opinion filed August 19, 1922.
The judgment should not be reversed or a new trial granted in any case, civil or criminal, for errors in rulings upon admission or rejection of evidence, or for errors in giving or refusing charges, or for errors in any other matter of procedure or practice, unless it shall appear to the court from a consideration of the entire cause that such errors injuriously affect the substantial rights of the complaining party. Nor should a judgment be reversed of a new trial granted on the ground that the verdict is not sustained by the evidence, unless it appears that there was no substantial evidence to support the finding, or that upon the whole evidence the verdict is clearly wrong, or that the jury were not governed by the evidence in making their finding.
A Writ of Error to the Circuit Court for Jackson County, C. L. Wilson, Judge.
Affirmed.
Smith di Da/vis and Amos E. Lewis, for Plaintiff in Error.
Bwers Buford, Attorney General, Marvm C. McIntosh, Assistant Attorney General, 'Garter, Campbell & Carter- and Paul Carter, for the State.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
On the authority of Gee v. State, 61 Fla. 22, 54 South. Rep. 458; Goff v. State, 60 Fla. 13, 53 South. Rep. 327; Owens v. State, 65 Fla. 483, 62 South. Rep. 651; Pittman v. State, 82 Fla. 24, 89 South. Rep. 336; Dixon v. State, 79 Fla. 586, 84 South. Rep. 541; Reeves v. State, 68 Fla. 96, 66 South. Rep. 432; Johnson v. State, 80 Fla. 61, 85 South. Rep. 155, and other similar decisions as to harmless error of procedure, the judgment of conviction herein should be affirmed.
The judgment should not be reversed or a new trial granted in any case, civil or criminal, for- errors in ruling upon the admission or rejection of evidence, or for errors in giving or refusing charges, or for errors in any other matter of procedure or practice, unless it shall appear to the court from a consideration of the entire cause that such errors injuriously affect the substantial rights of the complaining party. Nor should a judgment be reversed or a new trial granted on the ground that the verdict is not sustained by the evidence, unless it appears that there was no substantial evidence to support the finding, or that upon the whole evidence the verdict is clearly wrong, or that the jury were not governed by the evidence in making their finding.
Affirmed.
Browne, C. J., and Taylor, Whitfield, Ellis and West, J. J., concur.