JOHNNIE LEE JONES, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
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 court held that a defendant waives irregularities in jury selection by proceeding to trial without objection.
Appellant was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to life imprisonment. He later filed a motion to vacate judgment, alleging an illegal jur…
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 Judgment And Sentence cases and more on FLexlaw
The appellant was indicted for first degree murder and tried before a jury. At the trial, appellant was represented by a court-appointed attorney. Appellant was found guilty with recommendation of mercy and was sentenced to life imprisonment.
Appellant was sentenced on July 9, 1971. He immediately began filing a series of motions claiming violation of constitutional rights. On October 30, 1972, appellant filed the motion to vacate judgment and sentence with which we are here concerned. The motion was considered by the trial court and denied. The trial court found:
* * * * * *
“Defendant was tried, convicted and sentenced by this Court. He appealed and the trial court was affirmed. His Motions are based upon the allegation and ground that the jury panel from which the trial jury was selected was illegal. Petitioner has asked for a testimentary [sic] hearing on this question.
“The Court has examined the court file and finds that no appropriate challenge to the panel was made by the Defendant. Accordingly, the jury was selected in the process of which Defendant did not exercise all of the available peremtory [sic] challenges.
“It is the finding of the Court that by going to trial before a jury without any objections, a defendant waives all irregularities in drawing, summoning and empaneling of such jurors. 33 F.S.A. Rules of Criminal Procedure 3.300. State vs. Silva [Fla.] 259 So.2nd 153; . . ".
* * * * * *
Appellant has appealed and we have reviewed the record in the light of the arguments presented on appeal. We hold that the findings of the trial court are fully substantiated by the record and the law.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Collom v. City OF ST. Petersburg, 400 So. 2d 507 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981)…ian traffic. Therefore, the argument goes, the city had no duty to maintain the area in a safe condition, and thus the summary judgment was proper for that reason. Reliance is placed upon our cryptic affirmance in Runowich v. City of St. Petersburg, 276 So. 2d 83 (Fla.2d DCA 1973), which relied on Musetto v. City of Miami Beach, 82 So. 2d 595 (Fla.1955). The cited cases involved injuries sustained in tripping over meter boxes or falling into holes in grassy areas provided for beautification — areas in which…
-
Arnold v. Louie L. Wainwright, 516 F.2d 964 (5th Cir. 1975)…on or the failure of the indictment or information to charge an offense shall be noticed by the court at any time during the pendency of the proceeding. . See, e. g., State v. Silva, Fla.1972, 259 So. 2d 153; Jones v. Florida, Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1973, 276 So. 2d 83; Johnson v. State, Fla.Dist.Ct. App.1972, 268 So. 2d 544, aff’d Fla.1974, 294 So. 2d 69; State v. Bethel, Fla.Dist.Ct.App. 1972, 268 So. 2d 557. . The appellants contended at the hearing on remand that a showing of actual prejudice was unnecessary…