Court Opinion

ID: 9825398
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 12:52:44.776046+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:40:46.710910
License: Public Domain

On Rehearing.
In considering the application for rehearing we have attentively examined and considered the entire evidence adduced upon the trial of this case in the court below. We adhere to the conclusion reached by us, and announced in the original opinion, to the effect that the evidence as a whole presented a jury question, and therefore the court was •.without authority to direct a verdict. The law is: “The general charge should never be given when there is any evidence, however weak and inconclusive it may be, tending to make a ease against the party who asks it.” Ode Grimes v. State, ante, p. 378, 135 So. 652, 653, and numerous cases therein cited.
The purport of the earnest insistence of appellant’s counsel, on rehearing, is that this court will hold the evidence of the several state’s witnesses to be “negative,” or untrue. This, of course, we cannot do, as we are without authority to substitute ourselves for the jury. The probative force of the evidence and the weight to be accorded is the province of the jury; not for the court to determine. Each of the several state witnesses testified to facts sufficiently incriminating to carry the question of the guilt or innocence of the accused to the jury.
Application overruled.