CHARLES LAVERN HAYES, APPELLANT,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By

• McMILLAN v. State, 832 So. 2d 946 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002)
  …charging documents which could have easily been corrected if they had been pointed out before trial. Id. Where the charging document is merely imperfect or imprecise, the failure to challenge it by motion to dismiss waives defect. State v. Wimberly, 459 So. 2d 456 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984). On the other hand, where an information totally omits an essential element of the crime or is so vague, indistinct or indefinite that he is misled or exposed to double jeopardy, it is fundamentally defective. Id. The overriding…
• Connolly v. State, 172 So. 3d 893 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015)
  …(Fla. 3d DCA 2010) (“An information is fundamentally defective1 only where it totally omits an essential element of the crime or is so vague, indistinct or indefinite that the defendant is misled or exposed to double jeopardy.”); State v. Wimberly, 459 So. 2d 456, 458-59 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984) (“There is a difference between an information that completely fails to charge a crime and one where the charging allegations are incomplete or imprecise. The former is fundamentally defective. However, where the informat…
• Ingraham v. State, 32 So. 3d 761 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010)
  …he preparation of his defense, or expose him after conviction or acquittal to the substantial danger of a new prosecution for the same offense. Jones v. State, 415 So. 2d 852, 853 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982) (citations omitted); see also State v. Wimberly, 459 So. 2d 456, 458-59 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984) (quoting Jones for the foregoing proposition). Having this distinction in mind, we turn to an examination of count two of the information in this case. As noted above, the information reflects that the State charged Mr.…

Authorities Cited

• Carter v. State, 452 So. 2d 953 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984)
• Jackson Leroy Neely v. State, 453 So. 2d 129 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984)
• Matey v. James H. Pruitt Real Est., Inc., 455 So. 2d 1153 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984)