EX PARTE R. W. TURNER, ET AL., PETITIONERS
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.
County commissioners were held in contempt by a circuit court for directing the release of a prisoner serving a sentence imposed by that court. The Florida Supreme Court held that interfering with a prisoner's custody is regulated by statute, not by court order, and therefore cannot constitute contempt of court.
County commissioners cannot be held in contempt for directing the release of a prisoner, because custody of a prisoner serving a sentence is regulated by statute, not by judicial orders. The circuit court lacked jurisdiction to detain the petitioners in punishment for contempt because their action was not a contempt of court.
“The custody of a prisorter who is-scving, under sen-fence df a-court, is--regulated by statute, not by judicial orders; -and an interference with such custody Or -a vio-lation of statutory regulations is not 'a contempt of the court, though such interference or violation may be redressed by due course of law.”
Establishes the fundamental principle that prisoner custody is governed by statute, not court orders, and therefore violations cannot constitute contempt
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDick Marshall was adjudged guilty of aggravated assault by the circuit court and sentenced to pay a fine, with imprisonment in county jail for nine mo…
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 Jurisdiction Of Circuit Court cases and more on FLexlaw
Whitfield, J.
The’petitioners applied to this court for a writ of habeas corpus' alleging in effect that they áte illegally deprived of their 'liberty by the’ Sheriff of'”Columbia County in this: that the Circuit Judge issued a' rule against them stating that one1 Dick Marshall had'been' by the court adjudged guilty of aggravated assault and sentenced to pay a fine and in default thereof to be ini prisoned in the county jail for nine months; that it was reported to the court that the petitioners as county commissioners of the county had directed and caused the release of the said Dick Marshall from jail “contrary to ' law, and in defiance of the order, sentence and judgment 'of this court.” -The command was to show cause why they “should not be considered held and adjudged to be guilty of contempt of this court.” The return in effect averred that Dick Marshall was in good faith directed to be discharged from jail for reasons stated but immaterial here, which the commissioners thought sufficient to justify their action. The court adjudged them in contempt and imposed a fine on each, a default in payment to be followed by custody of the persons by .the sheriff until fines and costs are paid.
A writ of habeas corpus was issued returnable before this court. The return of the sheriff stated the custody .of the petitioners to be based on the proceedings as above set out.
Habeas corpus is an-appropriate remedy to test the jurisdiction of a Circuit Court in a stated case to punish as for a contempt. See Florida Cent. & P. R. Co. v. Williams. 45 Fla. 295, text 298, 33 South. Rep. 991; Ex parte Senior, 37 Fla. 1, 19 South. Rep. 652; Ex parte Edwards, 11 Fla. 174; 21 Cyc. 295. See also Ex parte Edmondson, 68 Fla. 53, 66 South. Rep. 292; Junius Hart Piano House v. Ingman, 119 La. 1017, 44 South. Rep. 850; Merrimack River Savings Bank v. City of Clay Center, 219 U. S. 527, 31 Sup. Ct. Rep. 295, 22 Ann. Cas. 513; Harlan v. McGourin, 218 U. S. 442, 31 Sup. Ct. Rep. 44, 21 Ann. Cas. 849.
The custody-of a prisorter who is-scrying, under sen-fence df a-court, is--regulated by statute, not by judicial orders'; -and an interference with such custody Or -a vio lation of statutory regulations is not 'a contempt of the court, though such interference or violation may be redressed by due course of law.
As the action of the petitioners in directing the discharge of the prisoner while serving a sentence of imprisonment was not a contempt of the court that imposed the sentence, the circuit judge was without jurisdiction to detain the petitioners in punishment as for a contempt.
The petitioners will be discharged.
Browne, C. J., and Taylor, Shackleford and Ellis, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Ex parte Earman, 85 Fla. 297 (Fla. 1923)…sentence of imprisonment had jurisdiction of the person, had authority to render such a sentence and had proper predicate for its sentence in the charge and the proofs or admission duly adduced before the sentence. See Ex parte Turner, 73 Fla. 360, 74 South. Rep. 314. If a person is illegally adjudged and imprisonéd. for contempt of court and the penalty imposed does not vio [*316] late fundamental rights, he will not be discharged from such imprisonment on habeas carpus but if the matters complained of in the…
-
Baumgartner v. Joughin, 105 Fla. 335 (Fla. 1932)…le record now before the Court discloses an act of contempt, plainly and specifically charged in the commitment and supported by the proceedings upon which the contempt judgment is based. If it does, the petitioner must be remanded. Ex parte Turner, 73 Fla. 360, 74 Sou. Rep. 314; Ex parte Earman, 85 Fla. 297, 95 Sou. Rep. 755, 31 A. L. R. 1226. Trial by capable juries is the bulwark of the administration of the criminal law. Exercise of calm, unbiased and informed judgment is essential to proper functioni…
-
Wilson v. Joughin, 105 Fla. 353 (Fla. 1932)…ed the sentence [*360] of imprisonment had jurisdiction of the person, had authority to render such a sentence and had proper predicate for its sentence in the charge and the proofs or admission duly adduced before the sentence. See Ex Parte Turner, 73 Fla. 360, 74 South. Rep. 314. If a person is illegally adjudged and imprisoned for contempt of court and the penalty imposed does not violate fundamental rights, he will not be discharged from such imprisonment on habeas corpus but if the matters complained…
Previewing 3 of 10 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Harlan v. McGourin, 218 U.S. 442 (U.S. 1910)
- Ex parte Senior, 37 Fla. 1 (Fla. 1896)
- Merrimack River Sav. Bank v. City of Clay Ctr., 219 U.S. 527 (U.S. 1911)
- Ex parte Edwards, 11 Fla. 174 (Fla. 1867)
- The Fla. Cent. & Peninsular R.R. Co. v. Williams, 45 Fla. 295 (Fla. 1903)
- Ex parte Edmondson, 68 Fla. 53 (Fla. 1914)