W. B. DOUGLASS, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR,
v.
W. J. SHACKELFORD AS MARSHAL OF THE CITY OF LAKE CITY, 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.
W. B. Douglass challenges a municipal court conviction and sentence via habeas corpus. The Florida Supreme Court affirms the Circuit Court's order remanding Douglass to custody for proper sentencing by the Mayor, holding that despite procedural defects in the original sentence, the finding of guilt stands and the court had authority to order resentencing.
The Circuit Court properly ordered remand for resentencing. Although the original sentence may be unenforceable due to procedural defects, the finding of guilt is valid and the court has power to remand for proper imposition of sentence by the Mayor.
“While the sentence of the municipal court as rendered may be unenforceable, yet there is a finding of guilt on the charge made and the Circuit Judge had the power to remand the petitioner for a proper sentence.”
Establishes the core holding: conviction survives even if sentence is defective, and courts may order resentencing
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDouglass was tried in municipal court on July 31, 1916, for an offense against the peace of Lake City, found guilty, and sentenced to either pay fines…
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 Habeas Corpus Proceedings cases and more on FLexlaw
Per Curiam.
It appears that based upon a charge of committing an offense against the peace of the city of Lake City, W. B. Douglass was tried by the municipal 'court on July 31, 1916, found guilty and adjudged to “pay a fine of $100.00 cash fine and $100.00 remitted on good behavior for one year, or be confined in the city jail for the period of 60 days at hard labor;” that a writ of error taken to the Circuit Court on August 291 1916, was on October 23, 1916, dismissed on the ground that no judgment had been entered; that no mandate of the Circuit Court' has been issued and filed in the lower court ; that no commitment was issued from the municipal court; that the judgment of the municipal court was not signed till November 20-, 1916.
On habeas corpus proceedings the Circuit Judge “ordered that petitioner be and he is hereby remanded to the custody of respondent, W. J. Shackelford, -as Marshal of the City of Lake City,-Florida, tobe taken by him before the Mayor of said city for the purpose of allowing sentence to be passed and imposed upon him by the said Mayor of said City of Lake City, Florida, upon the trial and conviction of petitioner heretofore had before said Mayor; and it is further ordered that unless such sentence shall be imposed within ten days from the date hereof, then petitioner shall be-discharged.” A writ of error was allowed and taken to this.Court.
While the sentence of the municipal court as rendered may be unenforceable, yet there is a finding of guilt on the charge made and the Circuit Judge had the power to remand the petitioner for a proper sentence. Faison v. Vestal, City Marshal, 71 Fla. 562, 71 South. Rep. 759.
Judgment affirmed.
Browne, C. J., and Taylor, Shackleford, Whitfield and Ellis, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Johnson v. State, 81 Fla. 783 (Fla. 1921)…ence on the charge of possession of .intoxicating liquor at his place of business contrary to the statute, if he does not duly show that the possession was not unlawful. See Ex Parte Simmons, 73 Fla. 998, 75 South. Rep. 542; Douglass v. Shackleford, 73 Fla. 889, 75 South. Rep. 213; Faison v. Vestal, 71 Fla. 562, 71 South. Rep. 759; Baender v. Barnett, U. S. , 41 Sup. Ct. Rep. 271. The judgment remanding the petitioner to the custody of the sheriff on a commitment issued under the sentence of the county ju…
-
Ex parte Browne, 93 Fla. 332 (Fla. 1927)…ner may be remanded for a proper sentence, there being no illegality in the proceedings prior to the judgment and sentence. Faison v. Vestal, 71 Fla. 562, 71 South. Rep. 759; Ex parte Simmons, 73 Fla. 998, 75 South. Rep. 542; Douglas v. Shackelford, 73 Fla. 889, 75 South. Rep. 203; Johnson v. State, 81 Fla. 783, 89 South Rep. 114; State ex rel. Johnson v. Quigg, 83 Fla. 1, 90 South. Rep. 695; McDonald v. Smith, 68 Fla. 77, 66 South. Rep. 430; Porter v. State, 62 Fla. 79, 56 South. Rep. 406; Blackwelder v.…
-
State v. Quigg, 83 Fla. 1 (Fla. 1922)…entence of imprisonment is reversed and petitioner will be produced to the Municipal Court for appropriate proceedings. See Faison v. Vestal, 71 Fla. 562, 71 South. Rep. 759; Ex Parte Simmons, 73 Fla. 998, 75 South. Rep. 542; Douglas v. Shackelford, 73 Fla. 889, 75 South. Rep. 203; 81 Fla. 783, 89 South. Rep. 114. It is so ordered. Browne, C. J., and Taylor, Ellis and West, J. J., concur.…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Faison v. Vestal, 71 Fla. 562 (Fla. 1916)