WILLIS V. MCCALL, SHERIFF OF LAKE COUNTY, FLORIDA, PETITIONER,
v.
REUBIN O'D. ASKEW, GOVERNOR OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENT
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.
Sheriff McCall petitioned for a writ of certiorari to challenge a circuit judge's order transferring a grand jury investigation into an inmate's death from Lake County to Orange County. The Florida District Court of Appeal affirmed the transfer, holding that the applicable statute clearly authorized the circuit judge to transfer grand jury investigations to other circuits when conditions make it impractical to convene a grand jury in the county where the offense occurred.
Yes. Florida Statute 905.21 clearly authorizes a circuit judge to transfer a grand jury investigation to another circuit when the judge determines that conditions make it impractical to convene a grand jury in the county where the offense occurred. No findings of fact or adversary hearing is statutorily required; the judge may rely on his own knowledge.
[1] A circuit judge may transfer a grand jury investigation to another county if the judge determines that conditions in the original county make it impractical to convene a…
[2] A circuit judge's determination of impracticality for convening a grand jury does not require a finding of fact or an adversary hearing.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“When an offense has been committed in a county and the circuit court has determined that conditions in that county make it impractical to convene a grand jury, any grand jury within the circuit or in any circuit to which the judge of the circuit court refers the matter may inquire into the offense.”
The statutory provision authorizing the circuit judge's transfer of the grand jury investigation, establishing the plain language basis for the court's holding.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceTommy J. Vickers was arrested in Miami and incarcerated in the Lake County jail on April 12, 1972. He was transferred to a mental health unit on April…
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 Writ Of Certiorari cases and more on FLexlaw
Tommy J. Vickers was arrested in Miami, Dade County, Florida, on April 12, 1972, and upon capias being executed by a Lake County Deputy Sheriff, Vickers was incarcerated in the Lake County jail until April 20, 1972, at which time he was transferred to the Mental Health Unit of Waterman Memorial Hospital. There Vickers died on April 23, 1972.
A Coroner’s Jury made inquiry into the manner of Vickers’ death and returned the following verdict:
“The deceased died from acute peritonitis as a result of a blow to the lower abdomen incurred by mischance or accident, the said blow inflicted by persons (sic) or persons unknown.”
Subsequent thereto Circuit Judge W. Troy Hall, Jr. empaneled a Grand Jury to investigate Vickers’ death.
On May 19, 1972, a motion was filed in behalf of respondent Reubin O’D. Askew, Governor of the State of Florida, requesting the transfer of the Grand Jury investigation to a location outside of Lake County. Pursuant to said motion, Judge Hall issued his order transferring the Grand Jury investigation to Orange County, Florida. Said Grand Jury is to convene in Orange County on June 5, 1972.
Petitioner Willis V. McCall, Sheriff of Lake County, Florida, filed in this court a petition for writ of certiorari, and questions the order of the trial judge transferring the investigation. Fla.Stat. 905.21, F.S.A., reads in pertinent part:
“When an offense has been committed in a county and the circuit court has determined that conditions in that county make it impractical to convene a grand jury, any grand jury within the circuit or in any circuit to which the judge of the circuit court refers the matter may inquire into the offense. . . . ” (Emphasis added.)
It therefore becomes apparent that the clear meaning of the statute as amended effective January 1, 1971, provides that the circuit judge may do exactly what Judge Hall has done. It does not, in our opinion, require a finding of fact or an adversary hearing. *889It requires only that the circuit judge determine that conditions make it impractical. What those conditions are and why it may be impractical could, from a clear reading of the statute, be determined by the circuit judge’s own knowledge which would require no motion or hearing. Higginbotham v. State, 1924, 88 Fla. 26, 101 So. 233. It appears that the trial judge could on his own motion make such transfers if he felt conditions made it impractical to convene a Grand Jury in the circuit in which the event happened that was being investigated.
No purpose would be served by this court to elaborate on a Grand Jury proceeding. It is what it says it is, an investigation of an incident, and it may be held in any circuit where the circuit judge transfers it. Suffice it to say, the allegations contained in the petition for writ of certio-rari anticipate events that may never happen ; and no showing is made in any event that those events, if they do materialize, will result in irreparable injury to petitioner.
The petition for certiorari is without merit and is therefore denied.
MANN and McNULTY, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Beckwith v. The Bd. OF Pub. Instruction OF Dade Cnty., 261 So. 2d 504 (Fla. 1972)
Authorities Cited
- Higginbotham v. State, 88 Fla. 26 (Fla. 1924)