Torr v. State

Supreme Court of Florida December 6, 1932

Torr v. State, 144 So. 839 (Fla. 1932)

107 Fla. 382

Whitfield, Terrell, Davis, Brown

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.

Even if the information herein charges an offense under the statute when the essential language of the statute or its equivalent is not used in the information, the judgment of conviction of larceny of an automobile is predicated upon evidence that does not show a taking with felonious intent; and a new trial should have been granted. See Percifield v. State, 93 Fla. 247, 111 So. 379; Dean v. State, 41 Fla. 291, 26 So. 628; Cooper vs. State, 82 Fla. 365, 90 So. 375.

Eeversed.

Whitfield, P. J., and Terrell and Davis, J. J., concur. Brown, J., concurs in the opinion and judgment.

Filed under Eule 21-A.

Reference

Full Case Name: R. S. Torr, Plaintiff in Error, vs. the State of Florida, Defendant in Error
Status: Published