SAMUEL STEWART AND LENNIE STEWART, PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, DEFENDANT IN ERROR

Fla. | 1900-01-01
42 Fla. 196 Florida Supreme Court (1900) Negative Treatment
Cited by 2 cases
Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam :

Per Curiam :

Upon taking up this cause for final adjudication the court is confronted with the fact that the writ of error therein, issued by the clerk of the Criminal Court of Record of Hillsborough county, is tested in the name of the Judge of the Criminal Court of Record, instead of in the name of the Chief-Justice of the Supreme Court,. as is required by law (§1270 Rev. Stats.). This is tantamount to no writ of error at all, and no application being made to-amend, even if such amendment could properly be made, the said writ is, therefore, hereby dismissed. Knight v. Weiskopf, 21 Fla. 157; Joost v. Elliott, 20 Fla. 924.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Palmer v. Johnson, 97 Fla. 479 (Fla. 1929)
    …f the judge of the trial court was insufficient, and in Knight v. Weiskopf, 21 Fla. 157, it was ruled that a writ of scire facias acl audiendum errores would not avail when tested in the name of the clerk of the trial court. And in Stewart v. State, 42 Fla. 196, 28 So. R. 56, a writ of error from the Supreme Court, which was tested in the name of the trial court judge, was held ineffectual, and the writ was dismissed sua sponte. But in Williams v. Pitt, 38 Fla. 162, 20 So. R. 936, the writ was tested in th…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw