GEORGE E. ARMSTRONG, PETITIONER,
v.
R. O. CULVER, DIRECTOR, FLORIDA STATE PRISON, RESPONDENT
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 denied a second petition for a writ of habeas corpus, finding that the issues raised had already been decided in a prior, similar petition and were therefore res judicata.
No, the second petition for a writ of habeas corpus is denied because the issues raised have already been adjudicated and are thus res judicata.
“In spite of our prior consideration of these matters petitioner filed the instant petition for writ of habeas corpus.”
Establishes the repetitive nature of the petitioner's filings.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe petitioner filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus on October 29, 1958, alleging grounds identical to those in a previous petition filed on J…
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 Petition For Writ Of Habeas Corpus cases and more on FLexlaw
The above-entitled cause came on this date for consideration of a petition for writ of habeas corpus, which was filed on October 29, 1958.
Review of this court’s records discloses that petitioner herein previously filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus on January 30, 1958. Thereafter on February 11, 1958, we issued the writ and upon due consideration of the response returned to said writ, this court ordered the writ quashed and petitioner remanded to custody on April 15,-1958.
In spite of our prior consideration of these matters petitioner filed the instant petition for writ of habeas corpus. The October 29, 1958, petition alleges grounds identical to those set forth in the first petition filed on January 30, 1958.
On due consideration of the instant petition for writ of habeas corpus, we hereby deny the same for the reason that all matters herein alleged have been previously considered in our quashing of the petitioner’s prior writ and therefore are res ju-dicata as to this petition.
The petition for writ of habeas corpus is hereby denied.
TERRELL, C. J., and THOMAS, THORNAL and O’CONNELL, JJ., concur.