STATE OF FLORIDA, EX REL. CARL METCALF, PETITIONER,
v.
M. P. LEHMAN, SHERIFF OF DADE COUNTY, 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.
Florida Supreme Court resolved a jurisdictional conflict between a Circuit Court's remand order and a Criminal Court of Record's bail order when a defendant appeared in criminal court after initial habeas corpus relief. The Court held that once the defendant appeared in the Criminal Court of Record following the Circuit Court's remand, the Criminal Court gained exclusive authority over bail conditions, superseding the earlier Circuit Court order.
The Circuit Judge's order was no longer in effect once the defendant appeared in the Criminal Court of Record following the remand. Upon that appearance, custody and control transferred to the Criminal Court of Record Judge, who possessed full power to fix reasonable bail amounts and conditions. The Criminal Court Judge's bail order therefore superseded the earlier Circuit Court order.
“When the defendant appeared in the Criminal Court of Record in open court after the order of the Circuit Judge remanding him to the custody of the sheriff to appear before the Criminal Court of Record for trial, the order of the Circuit Judge was then satisfied and the custody of the defendant was from thenceforth under the control of the Judge of the Criminal Court of Record.”
Establishes the central holding that the Circuit Judge's order was satisfied upon appearance in Criminal Court, transferring custody and control to the Criminal Court Judge
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMetcalf was charged with breaking and entering with intent to commit grand larceny in Dade County. After arrest on a capias, he obtained habeas corpus…
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 Appearance Bond cases and more on FLexlaw
The record in this case shows that the petitioner, Metcalf, was informed against in the Criminal Court of Record of Dade County, charged with breaking and entering a building with intent to commit grand *1069larceny; that he was arrested upon a capias issuing out of the Criminal Court' of Record of Dade County, Florida. He sued out writ of habeas corpus before one of the Circuit Judges of Dade County. The writ was issued on the 27th day of November, 1931. On hearing the petitioner was remanded to the custody of the Sheriff of Dade County, Florida, to be held by him for trial in the Criminal Court of Record of Dade County, Florida, on charge of “breaking and entering” and it was ordered by the court “that the said petitioner, Carl Metcalf, be and he hereby is permitted to make bail for his appearance in said Criminal Court of Record of Dade County, Florida, in the sum of $2500.00.” This order was signed by one of the Circuit Judges of Dade County on the 28th of November, 1931. The defendant did not make the bond.
On December 1st the defendant was brought into open court in the presence of Hon. E. C. Collins, Judge thereof, O. A. Worley, prosecuting for the State as Acting County Solicitor, Bart A. Riley and Frank B. Dowling as Attorneys for the defendant, Metcalf. Mr. Worley requested the court to allow the withdrawal of certain affidavits of disqualification, which request was granted. It was then announced to the court that neither the State nor the defense was ready for trial. Thereupon the case was continued for the term. Whereupon Mr. Riley, as counsel for defendant, moved the court to fix the amount and conditions of an appearance bond. Thereupon the following order was made.
“IT IS ORDERED that' the defendant Carl Metcalf be restored to his liberty upon filing a recognizance in the sum of $2500.00, signed by defendant, but without sureties, for his appearance at the next term of this Court'. Dated December 1st, 1931.
E. C. Collins
Criminal Court Judge.”
The bond was made as required by the order and was then and there approved by the Judge of the Criminal *1070Court of Record but' the Sheriff, being advised that the order of the Circuit Judge was still in force and effect, failed and refused to release the • petitioner on the bond approved by the Judge of the Criminal Court of Record, although the Judge of the Criminal Court of Record made the following endorsement on the bond: “Bond approved and defendant ordered released. E. C. Collins, Judge Criminal Court of Record of Dade County.”
Thereupon writ of habeas corpus was sued out from this Court. The sheriff made his return, admitting all fact's above set out and by an amended return shows that a new information charging the same offense has been filed. We are not advised what the purpose of this new information is and the purpose thereof is immaterial so far as the disposition here is concerned.
The only question for us to determine is whether or not the order of the Circuit Judge is still in force and effect. It is not. When the defendant appeared in the Criminal Court of Record in open court after the order of the Circuit Judge remanding him to the custody of the sheriff to appear before the Criminal Court of Record for trial, the order of the Circuit' Judge was then satisfied and the custody of the defendant was from thenceforth under the control of the Judge of the Criminal Court of Record. ITaving ■continued the case for the term, the Judge of the Criminal Court of Record was vested with power to fix the amount and conditions of the appearance bond within reasonable terms for the defendant. The Judge of that court may have allowed defendant to go on his own recognizance without the execution of any bond, or may have required him to give reasonable bond, with or without surety.
Inasmuch as the return of the sheriff shows that a new information has been filed against the defendant since the writ of habeas corpus issued from this Court, we must remand the petitioner to -the custody of the sheriff to be held or discharged according to such orders as may be made in *1071that behalf by the Judge of the Criminal Court of Record of Dade County. It is so ordered.
Whitfield, Ellis, Terrell, Brown and Davis, J.J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State of Fla. ex rel. Willis Sanders v. Kelly, 113 So. 2d 754 (Fla. 3d DCA 1959)…ceeding in which the court was sitting as a committing magistrate, no circumstances existed requiring the Circuit Court to set bond in the place and stead of the court which was empowered and under duty to do so. See State ex rel. Metcalf v. Lehman, 103 Fla. 1068, 138 So. 740. Now Therefore, It Is Ordered That writ is quashed and the petitioner, Willis Sanders, is remanded to the custody of the respondent without prejudice to apply to the said Metro Court or a judge thereof to fix an appearance bond for his…
-
State of Fla. ex rel. Richard Duncan Pearson v. Talmadge A. Buchanan, 179 So. 2d 254 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965)…ared in response to the bond fixed by the Circuit Court and standing before the trial court on the date of trial, the trial judge was possessed with the necessary jurisdiction to make inquiry into the bail. See State ex rel. Metcalf v. Lehman, 1932, 103 Fla. 1068, 138 So. 740. Upon the proceedings resuming before the trial judge on the question of bail pending the continued trial, inquiry was made if the petitioner had any evidence or argument from his counsel to offer, and none was forthcoming. Thereupon t…