ISHMAEL WASHINGTON
v.
NATHAN MAYO, FLORIDA PRISON CUSTODIAN
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.
Washington petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus claiming his imprisonment violated principles established in Joyner v. State. The Florida Supreme Court rejected his claim, finding that his multiple felony convictions properly fell under habeas corpus statutes rather than the Joyner exception, and remanded him to custody.
The court held that Washington's convictions did not come within the purview of Joyner v. State or related precedents, and instead properly fell within the scope of Florida Statutes sections 775.09 and 775.10, thereby denying the writ of habeas corpus.
“the petitioner based his claim of right to be discharged . upon our enunciations in Joyner v. State, 158 Fla. 806, So. (2) 304, third headnote”
Establishes the legal basis Washington relied upon for seeking habeas corpus relief
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceWashington had four separate felony convictions spanning 1926 to 1940, each committed after the previous conviction. His first conviction (January 11,…
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 Felony Conviction cases and more on FLexlaw
On August 10th, 1947, petitioner exhibited in this Court a document which was considered as a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and thereupon issued the writ.
The petitioner based his claim of right to be discharged . upon our enunciations in Joyner v. State, 158 Fla. 806, So. (2) 304, third headnote.
The return of the Attorney General which sets up the record of the several convictions of petitioner shows that the petitioner was convicted on January 11th, 1926, of a felony in the Circuit Court of Jackson County and sentenced to serve 5 years in the State Prison. After the expiration of this 5 year sentence, on September 4th, 1934, petitioner was convicted of a felony in the Criminal Court of Record in Duval *478County alleged to have been committed on a date subsequent to the conviction for the former offense and was sentenced to serve a term of 18 months in Duval County jail. After the expiration of this term, on October 31st, 1936, petitioner was convicted of a felony in the Criminal Court of Record of Duval County alleged to having been committed at a date subsequent to conviction of last offense and was sentenced to serve a period of 2 years. After the expiration of this term and on August 27th, 1940, petitioner was convicted of a felony in the Criminal Court of Duval County, alleged to have been committed at a date subsequent to conviction of last offense, and was sentenced to serve 6 years. That period of sentence has now expired but on the 5th day of September, 1940, subsequent to the four convictions, supra, petitioner was informed against and charged with being guilty of fourth conviction of a felony and, upon conviction, was sentenced to serve the balance of his natural life in State Prison.
So it definitely appears from the record that this petitioner does not come within the purview of the Joyner case, supra; nor does he fall within the purview of ex parte George F. Puckett, filed September 12, 1947, nor within the purview of Clemens v. Mayo, filed at this term of the Court. On the contrary, the record here shows that the several convictions of petitioner were had in such manner as to come within the purview of Section 775.09 and Section 775.10 Florida Statutes, 1941 (same F.S.A.).
So the writ of habeas corpus is quashed and the petitioner is remanded to the custody of respondent.
So ordered.
THOMAS, C. J., ADAMS and BARNS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Perry v. Mayo, 72 So. 2d 382 (Fla. 1954)…mstances an inference could be indulged that in each case, after the first, commission and conviction had occurred after the preceding conviction; and this being so the rigid rule announced in Joyner v. State, supra, was relaxed. Washington v. Mayo, 159 Fla. 477, 31 So. 2d 870. Bearing these two cases in mind, we proceed to examine a few decisions that seem to typify the pronouncements in both. In Scott v. Mayo, 159 Fla. 816, 32 So. 2d 821, the Court held that inasmuch as two of the four felonies describe…
-
Ishmael Washington v. Mayo, 91 So. 2d 621 (Fla. 1956)…l Act. The point to be determined is the legality of the sentence to life imprisonment imposed upon the petitioner. Some facet of this petitioner’s problem has been considered by this Court on two other occasions. Washington v. Mayo, 159 Fla. 477, 31 So. 2d 870; and Washington v. Mayo, Fla. 1955, 77 So. 2d 620, certiorari denied, 350 U.S. 851, 76 S.Ct. 91, 100 L.Ed. 757. Our prior decisions adequately set out the factual background. On August 27, 1940, the petitioner was sentenced to six years in the Stat…
-
Ishmael Washington v. Mayo, 77 So. 2d 620 (Fla. 1955)…d 346 U.S. 927, 74 S.Ct. 316, 98 L.Ed. 419. It appears from the allegations of the petition and the record in the cause that, in respect to petitioner’s first contention, this is precisely what he seeks to do. For in the case of Washington v. Mayo, 159 Fla. 477, 31 So. 2d 870, involving the present petitioner, this Court denied a writ of habeas corpus upon a petition setting forth the same objections to the information in question as are now raised. For the reasons stated there, which we now reaffirm, the…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Joyner v. State, 158 Fla. 806 (Fla. 1947)