LEWIS
v.
STATE
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 reversed a perjury conviction because the state failed to prove the alleged false swearing occurred in the specific court hearing alleged in the information. This case emphasizes the importance of the prosecution proving the exact allegations made in the charging document.
Yes, the variance was fatal. The state must prove the allegations set forth in the information, and the failure to prove the specific location of the alleged perjury as charged rendered the conviction invalid.
“No principle of criminal law is better settled than that the State must prove the allegations set up in the information or the indictment.”
Establishes the fundamental legal principle governing the prosecution's burden of proof.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe appellant was convicted of perjury for allegedly making false statements in a hearing before the Criminal Court of Record. However, the evidence p…
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.
Richard W. Ervin, Atty. Gen., Murray Sams, Jr. and B. Jay Owen, Assts. Atty. Gen., for appellee. TERRELL, Justice.
Appellant was tried and convicted in the Criminal Court of Record, Polk County on an information charging that he did commit perjury in violation of Section 837.02, Florida Statutes 1949, F.S.A. This appeal is from a judgment and sentence to serve ten years in the state penitentiary.
The pertinent part of the information charged that defendant falsely swore "in the hearing of a cause in the Criminal Court of Record in and for Polk County, Florida * * *" in which the State of Florida was plaintiff and T.A. Rountree was defendant. The evidence shows that the alleged false swearing took place before the Assistant County Solicitor rather than in the hearing of a cause in the Criminal Court of Record.
The point for determination is whether or not such a difference in the allegations of the information and the proof adduced at the trial constituted a fatal variance between the allegations and the facts proven.
No principle of criminal law is better settled than that the State must prove the allegations set up in the information or the indictment. When all the proof goes to show that the alleged perjury was committed in an investigation before the Assistant County Solicitor rather than in the hearing in the Criminal Court of Record, as alleged in the information, we are convinced that such a variance is fatal to the conviction. 41 Am. Jur. Section pages 31, 32 and 57. We are not advised as to the environment in which defendant was placed, but to let down the bar of strictness in the manner shown would be conducive to looseness in criminal prosecutions that might become intolerable to due process.
It is our view that the judgment should be reversed because the State failed to prove the alleged perjured statements on which the information and the judgment of conviction were predicated. Reversed.
SEBRING, C.J., and THOMAS and HOBSON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (19 total)
-
Crain v. State, 894 So. 2d 59 (Fla. 2004)…Federal and State Constitutions.”); Long v. State, 92 So. 2d 259, 260 (Fla.1957) (“[Wjhere an offense may be committed in various ways, the evidence must establish it to have been committed in the manner charged in the indictment.”); Lewis v. State, 53 So. 2d 707, 708 (Fla.1951) (“No principle of criminal law is better settled than that the State must prove the allegations set up in the information or the indictment.”). Consistent with this principle, the Third District Court of Appeal has held that a kidnap…
-
Long v. State, 92 So. 2d 259 (Fla. 1957)…ilty of conveying the 2X4 into the cell block, although there may have been sufficient evidence to sustain a conviction of aiding or assisting the prisoner to escape. See 42 C.J.S., Indictments and Informations, § 261, p. 1286; Lewis v. State, Fla., 53 So. 2d 707; Booker v. State, 93 Fla. 211, 111 So. 476; Hightower v. State, 39 Ga.App. 674, 148 S.E. 300; Fuller v. State, 120 Tex.Cr.R. 66, 48 S.W. 2d 303. Judgment reversed. THOMAS, Acting Chief Justice, and ROBERTS and DREW, JJ., concur.…
-
Lewis v. State, 53 So. 2d 707 (Fla. 1951)…53 So. 2d 707 (1951) LEWIS v. STATE. Supreme Court of Florida, Division A. July 24, 1951. *708 Oxford & Oxford, Lakeland, for appellant. Richard W. Ervin, Atty. Gen., Murray Sams, Jr. and B. Jay Owen, Assts. Atty. Gen., for appellee. TERRELL, Justice. Appella…
Previewing 3 of 19 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Lewis v. State, 53 So. 2d 707 (Fla. 1951)