S. BELCH, SUPERINTENDENT OF FLORIDA STATE REFORM SCHOOL, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR,
v.
EMMA MANNING, 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.
The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a lower court's decision to discharge a minor from a state reform school. The court found the commitment order insufficient because it lacked a specific finding of incorrigible and vicious conduct as required by statute.
No, the commitment order was invalid. The judgment lacked the essential finding that the minor was a proper subject for the institution's guardianship due to incorrigible and vicious conduct.
“The omission from the judgment of this essential element of validity renders the judgment insufficient to support the commitment and the petitioner was properly discharged.”
This quote explains the core reason for the court's decision to affirm the discharge.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceA minor, Emma Manning, was committed to the Florida State Reform School. The superintendent of the school was served with a writ of habeas corpus, and…
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 Habeas Corpus Review cases and more on FLexlaw
Whitfield, J.
—The defendant in. error upon habeas corpus was discharged from the state reform school. The superintendent of the institution upon whom the writ was served was allowed a writ of error and assigned as errors the issuing of the writ of habeas corpus and the discharge of the petitioner, Emma Manning from the state reform school.
Section 9 of chapter 5388, laws of Florida, acts of 1905, in so far as it authorizes circuit courts and county judges to commit minors over ten years and under eighteen years of age to the guardianship of the state reform school upon complaint in writing “and due proof made in the '¡presence of the person, that he • is a proper person for the guardianship of said institution, in consequence of incorrigible and vicious conduct,” has been held to be constitutional. Pugh v. Bowden, 54 Fla. 45 South. Rep. 499.,
The commitment is substantially in the form prescribed by the statute, but the judgment upon which the commitment is based is that “upon due proof. I do find that the said Emma Manning is a suitable person to be committed to the Florida state reform school.” There is no finding by the court that the petitioner is a proper person for the guardianship of the Florida state reform school, “in consequence of incorrigible and vicious conduct” as contemplated by said section 9, -chapter 5388.
The omission from the judgment of this essential element of validity renders the judgment insufficient to support the commitment and the petitioner was properly discharged.
The judgment is affirmed. •
Shackleford, C. J., and Cockrell, J., concur;
Taylor, Hocker and Parkhill, JJ., concur in the opinion.