SHADRACK BARDWELL, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, DEFENDANT IN ERROR
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.
Shadrack Bardwell, a Black defendant convicted of assault with intent to commit manslaughter, appealed his ten-year sentence on grounds including racial discrimination in jury selection. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, finding the bill of exceptions improperly presented and holding that the defendant's challenge to the jury panel lacked sufficient allegations of actual discrimination.
The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the second ground of the jury challenge was deficient because it merely alleged that qualified Black jurors existed in the county without alleging that none had been summoned or that any had been discriminated against based on race or color. Additionally, absent a valid bill of exceptions, the other assignments of error could not be considered on appeal.
“The bill of exceptions contained in the transcript was stricken on motion of the Attorney General because it was made to appear that it was presented to the judge for settlement and authentication after the expiration of the term when the trial was had, and no order of the court was made or entered on the minutes of the court allowing further time for making up and presenting the bill of exceptions after the expiration of the term of court as required by Rule No. 97 of the Circuit Court Rules.”
Explains the procedural defect that prevented consideration of most assignments of error on appeal.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceBardwell was convicted in the Criminal Court of Record for Escambia County of assault with intent to commit manslaughter and sentenced to ten years in…
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 Assault With Intent To Commit Manslaughter cases and more on FLexlaw
Whitfield, C. J.
The plaintiff in error was convicted in the Criminal Court of Record for Escambia county of the crime of assault with intent to commit manslaughter and from a judgment sentencing him to the State Penitentiary for ten years this writ of error was taken.
The bill of exceptions contained in the transcript was stricken on motion of the Attorney General because it was made to appear that it was presented to the judge for settlement and authentication after the expiration of the term when the trial was had, and no order of the court was made or entered on the minutes of the court allowing further time for making up and presenting the bill of exceptions after the expiration of the term of court as required by Rule No. 97 of the Circuit Court Rules.
A special venire of six jurors from the body of the county at large having been summoned the defendant challenged the array of special jurors on two grounds, vis: “First, because the sheriff in the selection of the panel, discriminated against negroes and failed to select any for the trial of defendant, the said discrimination being on account of their color, race and previous condition of servitude, defendant being a negro, charged with an assault on a white boy. Second, that there are a great many negroes in the county fully qualified for jury duty, according to the laws of the State of Florida.”
Issue was joined on the first paragraph of the challenge, testimony was taken and that ground of the challenge was denied. As there is no bill of exceptions in the transcript the assignment of error based on the decision on the first paragraph of the challenge can not be considered here. The second paragraph of the challenge was demurred to and one of the assignments of error is that “the court erred in sustaining demurrer to the sec ond ground of defendant’s challenge to the panel of the special venire of petit jurors.” Admitting only for the purposes of this case that such a challenge is a part of the record proper the demurrer should, have been sustained. The paragraph of the challenge demurred to was merely an allegation that a ^great many negroes in the county were qualified to be jurors, with no allegation that none of them had been summoned on the special venire, or that any negro had been discriminated against on account of race or color, in selecting and summoning the jury.
In the absence of a bill of exceptions none of the other assignments of error can be considered.
The judgment is affirmed.
Carter and Shackleford JJ. concur. Taylor, Hocker and Cockrell JJ. concur in the opinion.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Davenport v. State, 94 Fla. 32 (Fla. 1927)…by law, or they do not become a part of the record, even though copied into the transcript, and cannot be considered by the appellate court. 2 R. C. L. 144; Bush v. State, 21 Fla. 569; Washington v. State, 48 Fla. 62, 37 So. 573; Bardwell v. State, 49 Fla. 1, 38 So. 511; Carter v. Stockton, 60 Fla. 33, 53 So. 450; Jackson v. State, 84 Fla. 646, 94 So. 505; Granquist v. State, 86 Fla. 32, 97 So. 205; Lanier v. Shayne, 85 Fla. 212, 95 So. 617; Preston v. The State, 86 Fla. 476, 98 So. 358. In the absence…
-
Jackson v. State, 84 Fla. 646 (Fla. 1922)…sented to the trial court after the expiration of the further time allowed by the original special order can not be considered as part of the record. Bush v. State, 21 Fla. 569; Washington v. State, 48 Fla. 62, 37 South. Rep. 573; Bardwell v. State, 49 Fla. 1, 38 South. Rep. 511; Carter v. Stockton, 60 Fla. 33, 53 South. Rep. 450. There being no bill of exceptions in the record, the question of the sufficiency of the evidence to support the verdict is not presented. The judgment is affirmed. Browne, C…
-
DeSoto Holding Co. v. Boyer, 85 Fla. 517 (Fla. 1923)…ptions must be and is hereby granted. As the assignment of errors is predicated solely upon the bill of exceptions which is stricken, there remains no matter presented for review, therefore the judgment be and is hereby affirmed. Bardwell v. State, 49 Fla. 1, 38 South. Rep. 511; Horn v. State, 40 Fla. 472, 24 South. Rep. 147; Anderson v. Winner & Whaley, 50 Fla. 177, 39 South. Rep. 31; Lasseter & Co. v. Zapf, 57 Fla. 89, 48 South. Rep. 749; Carter v. Stockton, 60 Fla. 33, 53 South. Rep. 450. Affirmed.…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence