Raybon v. State

Decided October 15, 1954

Supreme Court of Florida · decided 1954-10-15

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“* * * although the proof might be said to be consistent with his guilt, we cannot hold that it is inconsistent with any other hypothesis. * * *”

quoted by 1 later decision, including 206 So. 2d 446 - Williams v. State

Relies on 53 So. 2d 533 - Kilbee v. State · 47 So. 2d 541 - Lyons v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1954-10-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently October 2012

14 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PER CURIAM.

¶1We have examined the transcript of testimony in this case, and find that the evidence against the appellant Fred Raybon is entirely circumstantial in character. It is concluded that the conviction of this appellant upon the circumstantial evidence herein cannot be sustained because, although the proof might be said to be consistent with his guilt, we cannot hold that it is inconsistent with any other hypothesis. Nor do we find it to be “of a conclusive character, pointing directly and unerringly to the accused’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt”, but, on the contrary, we believe that it does not go beyond “mere suspicion, probabilities or suppositions”. See Lyons v. State, Fla., 47 So.2d 541, 542.

¶2Reversed and remanded for new trial on authority of Lyons v. State, supra. See also Kilbee v. State, Fla., 53 So.2d 533.

ROBERTS, C. J., and TPIOMAS, HOB-SON and DREW, JJ., concur.