
    Mike Neicarta, Plaintiff in Error, v. The State of Florida, Defendant in Error.
    
    Opinion Filed October 8, 1920.
    Where there is ample evidence to sustain a verdict of guilty, without considering evidence asserted to have been improperly adduced, a judgment of conviction will not be reversed, where the error, if any, was rendered harmless by the testimony of the defendant, no material or harmful errors appearing in the record.
    A Writ of Error to tbe Circuit Court for Dade County; H. Pierre Branning, Judge.
    Judgment affirmed.
    
      G. A. Worley & Son, for Plaintiff in Error;
    
      Yam, G. Swearingen, Attorney General, and D. Stuart Gillis, Assistant, for the State.
   Whitfield, J.

Upon an indictment for murder, Mike Neicarta was convicted of manslaughter and took writ of error. The burden of the contention here is that the accused did not understand the English language and was not fully advised of his rights when he made a statement while under arrest as to why he shot the deceased, which statement was testified to by other witnesses. Even if there is any substantial basis in the record for this contention, the accused testified as to the circumstances under which he fatally shot the deceased, claiming justification because of an" assault made on him by the deceased, and as on the evidence without the testimony as to the statement, the verdict of manslaughter has sufficient legal support, the error, if any, in admitting testimony as to the statement, was harmless. No material or harmful errors of procedure appear; therefore, the judgment is affirmed.

Browne, C. J., and Taylor, Ellis and West, J. J., concur.  