J. R. ARMANTROUT, 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 dismissed a writ of error seeking to reverse a second-degree murder conviction because the appellate record was filed late and no cause was shown for the delay. The court emphasized the mandatory nature of the filing deadline.
Yes, the writ of error must be dismissed because the appellate record was filed late and no cause was shown for the delay, as required by court rules and statute.
“Under Supreme Court Rule 11 and Section 2915, Revised General Statutes, the writ of error should be dismissed, as no good cause, in fact no attempt has been made to show any cause, why ' ' a true copy of all proceedings in such cause in the court below" was not filed in this Court ' ' on or before the return day of the writ of error. ' '”
This quote establishes the legal basis for dismissing the writ of error due to the late filing of the record and the failure to provide justification.
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 convicted of second-degree murder on August 26, 1924. A writ of error was issued in October 1924, but it was made returnabl…
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 Timeliness Of Appellate Filings cases and more on FLexlaw
Ellis, J.
The plaintiff in. error was convicted of murder in the second degree, and seeks a reversal of the judgment on writ of error. He was charged with the murder of Roland) McCarthy on August 26, 1924.
A writ of error, as copied in the record, shows that it was taken out in October, 1924, and made returnable January 1st of that year, an impossible date. The record was filed January 31, 1925. The writ of error on file shows that the return day was January 1, 1924. Even if it be assumed that it was intended to make the writ returnable January 1. 1925, or on the 7th day of that month, just within the ninety days’ limit, the record would have been nearly a month late.
Under Supreme Court Rule 11 and Section 2915, Revised General Statutes, the writ of error should be dismissed, as no good cause, in fact no attempt has been made to show any cause, why ‘ ‘ a true copy of all proceedings in such cause in the court below” was not filed in this Court ‘ ‘ on or before the return day of the writ of error. ’ ’
As the statute makes it obligatory upon this Court to dismiss the writ of error such will be the order. It is ordered that the writ of error in this cause be, and the same is hereby, dismissed.
West, C. J., and Tkkrell, J., concur. Whitfield, P. J., and Strum and Brown, J. J., concur in the opinion. .
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Cacciatore v. State, 147 Fla. 758 (Fla. 1941)…solici [*764] tor; (c) the parties and the court had no authority under the law to extend the return date of the writ of error; (d) the order of dismissal cites Fidelity & Deposit Co. v. Manatee County, 78 Fla. 470, 83 So. 268; Armantrout v. State, 90 Fla. 379, 106 So. 126; Dupree v. Elleman, 139 Fla. 809; 191 So. 65. On petition for writ of certiorari in this Court it is contended that the order of the circuit judge dated January 23, 1941, dismissing the writ of error was invalid and unauthorized by law…1 / 2