A. L. MCELEVENE, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR,
v.
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.
The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a conviction for second-degree murder, finding that the indictment sufficiently alleged venue. The court distinguished the indictment from a prior case where venue was improperly stated.
Yes, the indictment sufficiently alleged venue by stating the crime occurred 'in the County and State aforesaid,' which is standard legal language for alleging venue.
“Here the indictment clearly lays the venue in Columbia County, State of Florida, and in doing so uses the language which is ordinarily and almost universally used in alleging the venue, towit: ‘1 In the State and County aforesaid.””
This quote explains the court's reasoning for finding the venue allegation sufficient.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe plaintiff in error was indicted for first-degree murder and convicted of second-degree murder in Columbia County, Florida. A key contention on app…
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 Sufficiency Of Indictment cases and more on FLexlaw
In this case plaintiff in error was indicted charged with murder in the first degree and was convicted of murder in the second degree in the Honorable Circuit Court of Columbia County, Florida. •
One of the contentions made here is that the indictment fails to sufficiently charge venue and counsel for plaintiff in error relies on the judgment and opinion in the case of Rimes vs. State in which opinion was filed March 28, 1931, and reported in 133 Sou. 550. In that case the indictment charged :
“The Grand Jurors of the State of Florida duly empanneled and sworn to inquire and true presentment make in and for the body of the County of Union, upon their oaths do present that Wilbur Rimes *640on the 4th day of August, A. D. 1929, did unlawfully and feloniously desert his lawful wife Virginia Rimes, and his lawful child Thomas H. Rimes.”
While in this case the indictment reads:
“The Grand Jurors of the State of Florida, duly chosen, empannelled and sworn diligently to inquire and true presentment make in and for the body of the County of Columbia, upon their oath present that, A. L. McElvene, whose Christian name is to the Grand Jurors unknown, late of said county, on the 3rd day of October A. D. 1931, in the County and State aforesaid, with a deadly weapon to-wit: a shot gun, loaded and charged with gun powder and leaden balls and which said shot gun he, the said A. L. McElvene, then and there had and held in his hands, in and upon one Nancy Kent,” etc.
Here the indictment clearly lays the venue in Columbia County, State of Florida, and in doing so uses the language which is ordinarily and almost universally used in alleging the venue, towit: ‘1 In the State and County aforesaid.”
Other assignments of error have been considered with the result that we find no' reversible error disclosed by the record. The judgment should be affirmed and it is so ordered.
Affirmed.
Ellis and Brown, J.J., concur.
Whitfield, P. J., and Terrell and Davis, J.J., concur in the opinion and judgment.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Theron Black, 385 So. 2d 1372 (Fla. 1980)…Adkins, J., concurring specially). The indictment in the case at bar did not even allege that the “grand jurors of Florida in Hernando County” presented that the defendant “in the county and state aforesaid” committed an offense. McElvene v. State, 105 Fla. 639, 142 So. 216 (1932). This is not an appropriate instance to encourage liberal amendment of imprecise allegations as long as the defendant is not prejudiced. Lackos v. State, 339 So. 2d 217 (Fla.1976). The indictment completely failed to allege venue…
-
Earvin Smith v. State, 211 So. 3d 176 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016)…ing specially). The indictment in the case at bar did not even allege that the “grand jurors of ... [*195] Florida ... in ... Hernando County” presented that the defendant “in the county and state aforesaid” committed an offense. McElvene v. State, 105 Fla. 639, 142 So. 216 (1932). This is not an appropriate instance to encourage liberal amendment of imprecise allegations as long as the defendant is not prejudiced. Lackos v. State, 339 So. 2d 217 (Fla.1976). The indictment completely failed to allege venue…
-
Gibson v. Longino, 111 Fla. 533 (Fla. 1933)…ted a part in Hamilton County and a part in Madison County, Florida, and to decree a lien upon the property to protect and enforce the rights of the complainant. This case has heretofore been before this Court. See Gibson et al. v. Longino- et al., 142 Sou. 216, in which case order overruling demurrer to bill of complaint was sustained. Upon going down of the mandate, answer was filed. Motion to strike the 14th paragraph of the answer was granted and thereafter motion to vacate order sustaining motion to…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Mathieu v. State, 101 Fla. 94 (Fla. 1931)