Legal Opinion

Fortner v. State

Supreme Court of Florida

Decided February 25, 1924PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtBrowne, J.

The only error assigned is that the court erred in denying the motion for a new trial, the grounds of which are that the verdict was contrary to the evidence, and not supported by the evidence.

This motion and the order denying it appear in the record proper, but not in the bill of exceptions.

The rule is well settled in this jurisdiction, that a motion for a new' trial is not a part of the record proper, but must be embodied in the bill of exceptions, together with the ruling thereon and the exception to such ruling, in order to present to the appellate court for consideration an assignment of…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. McDonald v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1903
  2. Johnson v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1907
  3. Revell v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1923
  4. Cooper v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1904
  5. Palmore v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1913

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Hall v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1925

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API