Case Name: Ralph Hughes, alias Ralph Holter, and Colon W. Knight, Plaintiffs in Error, v. The State of Florida, Defendant in Error
Court: Florida Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1923-07-20
Citations: 86 Fla. 202
Docket Number: 
Parties: Ralph Hughes, alias Ralph Holter, and Colon W. Knight, Plaintiffs in Error, v. The State of Florida, Defendant in Error.
Judges: Taylor, C. J., and Ellis, West and Terrell, J. J., concur.
Reporter: Florida Reports
Volume: 86
Pages: 202–208

Head Matter:
Ralph Hughes, alias Ralph Holter, and Colon W. Knight, Plaintiffs in Error, v. The State of Florida, Defendant in Error.
Opinion Filed July 20, 1923.
Petition for Rehearing Denied September 10, 1923.
In a prosecution where the offense charged is that of breaking and entering a building with intent to commit a felony, to-wit: grand larceny, such offense includes the lower offense of breaking and entering with intent to commit a misdemeanor, to-wit: petit larceny; and where the verdict is “guilty” without stating the degree of larceny intended to be committed in the breaking and entering, a judgment of conviction and sentence within the penalty prescribed for breaking and entering with intent to commit petit larceny, will not be reversed where there is evidence to sustain a conviction of the lesser offense, even though the greater offense is not shown by the evidence.
A Writ of Error to the Circuit Court for Marion County; W. S. Bullock, Judge.
Affirmed.
R. B. Bulloch and T. 8. Trantham, for Plaintiffs in Error;
Rivers Buford, Attorney General, and J. B. Gaines, Assistant, for the State.

Opinion:
Whitfield, J.
Upon an indictment charging' the breaking and entering of a railroad depot building with intent to commit a felony, to-wit, grand larceny, the defendants were found to be "guilty."
There is ample evidence properly admitted to prove the breaking and entering with intent to steal blank express money orders, etc., that were stolen and utilized by filling them out and collecting money on them greatly in excess of $50.00. For breaking and entering such a building with intent to commit a felony the penalty shall not exceed fifteen years in the State penitentiary. Sec. 5116, Rev. Gen. Stats. 1920. For breaking and entering to commit a misdemeanor the maximum penalty is imprisonment in the State prison not exceeding five years. Sec. 6119, Rev. Gen. Stats. 1920. The larceny of property of $50.00 value or more is a felony; while petit larceny of less than $50.00 in value is a misdemeanor. The sentence imposed is two years' imprisonment in the State prison. Breaking and entering with intent to commit the misdemeanor of petit larceny is included with the offense of breaking and entering with intent to commit the felony of grand larceny. In this case even if the evidence does not show a breaking and entering with intent to commit grand larceny, it does show a breaking and entering with an intent to commit petit larceny; and as the verdict is "guilty," which includes the lesser offense, and the sentence is appropriate to a verdict of guilty of breaking and entering with intent to commit the misdemeanor of petit larceny, the sentence is not repugnant to the charge or to the verdict, and conforms to the law and to the evidence adduced. See Clark v. State, 59 Fla. 9, 52 South. Rep. 518; United States v. Linnier, 125 Fed. Rep. 83; State v. Bloedow, 45 Wis. 279.
Even if technical errors of procedure were committed, they could not reasonably have been prejudicial or harmful to the defendants in view of the whole record of the trial and proceedings.
Affirmed.
Taylor, C. J., and Ellis, West and Terrell, J. J., concur.
Browne, J., dissents.