PER CURIAM.
The primary question involved on this appeal is the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the verdict of the jury. It is quite true that the record reflects a sharp conflict in the evidence adduced by the State and the appellant-defendant. We have held on many occasions that this Court will not substitute its judgment for that of a jury or interfere with a verdict of a jury where disputes and conflicts are in the record. It was within the province of the jury to believe the evidence adduced by the State and disbelieve the testimony of the appellant-defendant. Davis v. State, 74 Fla. 100, 76 So. 675.
It is next contended that the trial court erred in refusing to give at the request of the defendant certain written instructions to the jury to be considered by it in light of the entire proceeding. Requested instructions usually are considered by this Court in light of all the instructions given by the trial Court and if those as given in the general charges are sufficient on the point in controversy, then this Court will not interfere. It cannot be said, when the whole charge is reviewed in its entirety, that harmful error resulted to the appellant-defendant.
Other questions have been raised on this appeal by counsel for appellant which have been carefully considered by this Court but we are unable to say that appellant has clearly established reversible error on this record.
Affirmed.
ADAMS, C.J., CHAPMAN and HOBSON, JJ., and GERALD, Associate Justice, concur.