WILL JACKSON, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, DEFENDANT IN ERROR
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Will Jackson was convicted of breaking and entering a dwelling house at night with intent to steal and assault. The Florida Supreme Court dismissed his writ of error because the trial court's judgment was not included in the appellate transcript and the transcript was certified in improper form.
The writ of error must be dismissed because: (1) the transcript fails to show the sentence or judgment of the trial court entered upon the verdict, and (2) the transcript was certified in improper form, contrary to the rules governing writs of error in criminal cases.
“Writs of error in criminal eases like the present lie only from final judgments therein.”
Establishes the fundamental requirement that a final judgment must be part of the appellate record for a writ of error to be valid.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceOn December 6, 1901, an information was filed charging Jackson with breaking and entering the dwelling house of Thomas D. Fisher at night with intent …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Intent To Steal cases and more on FLexlaw
Garter, J.
On December 6, 1901, an information was duly filed in the Criminal Court of Record of Hillsborough county, charging the plaintiff in error with breaking and entering in the night time the dwelling-house of one Thomas D. Fisher with intent to steal property -exceeding the value of twenty dollars, and committing an assault upon a person lawfully in said dwelling-house.
On Mlarch 11, 1902, the defendant was duly arraigned' and tried and the jury by their verdict found him guilty as charged in the information. Defendant’s motion for a new trial having been overruled, he isu-ed out writ of error returnable to the present term of this court.
, Writs of error in criminal eases like the present lie only from final judgments therein. Sec. 2969 Rev.-Stats. The transcript filed) in thi® court fails to show the sentence or judgment of the court entered upon the verdict, if any, and consequently the writ of error must be dismissed. Savage v. State, 19 Fla. 561; Hart v. Cotten,. 44 Fla. 172, 31 South. Rep. 817. Moreover, the deck certifies the transcript in the form prescribed by special rule 3 for the government of Circuit Courts in the- preparation of bills of exceptions and transcripts of records in civil causes; whereas, the transcript should be certified in the form, prescribed by rule 103 of the rules of' the Circuit Court in common law actions, adopted at the' April term A. D. 1873, of the Supreme Court, which rule is applicable to write of error in criminal cases. See* special rule 5, adopted February 18, 1897. This defect in the form of the certificate is sufficient also to justify this court in dismissing the writ of error. Hart v. Cotten, supra.
The writ of error, for reasons stated, will be dismissed'..
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Mitchem v. State, 142 Fla. 75 (Fla. 1940)…Dick Nowling. The purported judgment entered by the lower court against Julian Mitehem is legally insufficient to support a writ of error because it is not a final judgment within the meaning of the law. See Section 8460 C. G. L.; Jackson v. State, 44 Fla. 439, 32 So. 926; Jumeau v. Camp, 48 Fla. 82, 37 So. 522; Melbourne v. State, 50 Fla. 113, 39 So. 593; Mathis v. State, 67 Fla. 277, 64 So. 944. The Court ex mero motu dismisses the writ of error as to Julian Mitehem. The judgments appealed from on the…
Authorities Cited
- Savage v. State, 19 Fla. 561 (Fla. 1882)
- Hart v. Cotten, 44 Fla. 172 (Fla. 1902)