PAUL M. DRAWDY, 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 reversed a judgment, holding that an information attempting to charge a defendant with inciting perjury was insufficient because it failed to set forth the necessary allegations to show that perjury would have been committed.
No, the information was insufficient because it failed to set forth all material allegations necessary to show that if the endeavor had been successful, perjury would have been committed.
“An information attempting to charge a person with the crime of endeavoring to incite or procure another to commit perjury must set forth all the material allegations necessary to’ show that if the endeavor had been successful perjury would have been committed and the proposed false statement sought to be procured, together with the true state of facts in that regard, must be set out with the same particularity that is required in an indictment for perjury.”
This quote establishes the legal standard for charging incitement to perjury.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe defendant was charged via information with violating a statute related to inciting perjury. The defendant filed a motion to quash the information.…
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.
Per Curiam.
In the information filed in this case it was attempted to charge the defendant with the violation of Section 5345, Revised General Statutes of Florida, Section 7479, Compiled General Laws of 1927. There was a motion to quash the information.
An information attempting to charge a person with the crime of endeavoring to incite or procure another to commit perjury must set forth all the material allegations necessary to’ show that if the endeavor had been successful perjury would have been committed and the proposed false statement sought to be procured, together with the true state of facts in that regard, must be set out with the same particularity that is required in an indictment for perjury.
The information in the present ease fails to meet the requirements as stated by this Court in the case of Fudge v. State, 57 Fla. 7, 49 So. R. 128, and cases there cited.
For the reasons stated the information should have been quashed and.it is, therefore, necessary to reverse the judgment. -It is so ordered.- Reversed.
Whitfield, P. J., and Strum and Buford, J. J., concur. Terrell, C. J., and Ellis and Brown? J. J., concur in the opinion and judgment.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Gordon v. State, 104 So. 2d 524 (Fla. 1958)…, however, on the proposition that in order to establish subornation of perjury it is essential that the commission of the crime of perjury by the person suborned must be proved as an element of the substantive crime of subornation. Drawdy v. State, 98 Fla. 473, 123 So. 913; Milligan v. State, supra. It is clear that in the case before us proof of the alleged perjury by Busbee and Arnold were conditions necessary to establish the charge of subornation of perjury leveled against Gordon and King. It will be…
Authorities Cited
- Fudge v. State, 57 Fla. 7 (Fla. 1909)