JOHN HENRY GIBSON, PETITIONER,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA ET AL., RESPONDENTS
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.
The Florida Supreme Court denied a petition for a writ of mandamus seeking to compel the State of Florida to prosecute a petitioner based on an outstanding felony warrant. The court found the writ unnecessary because the detainer and warrant had been withdrawn.
No, a writ of mandamus is not necessary in this situation because the withdrawal of the detainer and warrant renders the petitioner's request moot.
“Because of the representations last recited it is now apparent that the issuance of a writ of mandamus has become unnecessary.”
Establishes the primary reason for denying the writ.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePetitioner Gibson, a federal prisoner, sought a writ of mandamus to force the State of Florida to prosecute him on a felony warrant issued in Volusia …
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 Detainer cases and more on FLexlaw
The petitioner, Gibson, a federal prisoner, seeks a writ of mandamus to compel the State of Florida to prosecute him pursuant to a felony warrant issued by a justice of the peace in Volusia County, Florida. A detainer was placed against petitioner in an effort to assure his availability for prosecution by the Florida courts upon completion of service of the federal sentence. He seeks to compel immediate state prosecution in accord with Dickey v. Circuit Court, 200 So.2d 521 (Fla.1967). We are informed by the state attorney for the Seventh Judicial Circuit, which includes Volusia County, that the constable who placed the detainer against the petitioner has now withdrawn the same and has requested that it be returned to him. He has further requested that the original warrant for arrest be returned to the issuing court.
Because of the representations last recited it is now apparent that the issuance of a writ of mandamus has become unnecessary. For this reason the writ is denied and the application therefor is dismissed.
It is so ordered.
CALDWELL, C. J., and ROBERTS, THORNAL, ERVIN and HOPPING, JJ., concur.