A. O. LYNCH
v.
STATE
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 because the plaintiff in error failed to file a properly prepared transcript of the record, which is required for the court to consider arguments on appeal. Despite a potential concession of error by the state regarding the information used for conviction, the court lacked jurisdiction to reverse the judgment.
No, the Florida Supreme Court does not have jurisdiction to consider arguments regarding the insufficiency of an information when a properly prepared transcript of the record has not been filed. The court cannot reverse a judgment, even if it appears erroneous, without the proper record.
“this Court finds itself unable to consider the arguments' made in the brief of plaintiff in error as to the insufficiency of the information upon which the conviction appealed from was had, because there is before this Court no properly prepared transcript of the record filed here as required by the law and rules of this Court.”
Establishes the primary reason for the court's inability to hear the appeal.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe plaintiff in error appealed a conviction, arguing the information upon which it was based was insufficient. However, the plaintiff in error did no…
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.
— In this case this Court finds itself unable to consider the arguments' made in the brief of plaintiff in error as to the insufficiency of the information upon which the conviction appealed from was had, because there is before this Court no properly prepared transcript of the record filed here as required by the law and rules of this Court. While the brief of the Attorney General in effect concedes the insufficiency of the count of the information upon which plaintiff in error was sentenced, yet without something more than a certified copy of the information and judgment (which is all that is before us) this Court is without jurisdiction to reverse the judgment, even though it may appear to be erroneous.
The writ of error is accordingly dismissed.
Davis, C. J., and Whitfield, Ellis, Terrell, Brown and Buford, J. J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Bishop, 395 So. 2d 238 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981)…ffidavit defective. Finally, we note that appellees contend that this court must affirm the decision of the trial court because of the failure of the State to provide a transcript of the hearing on the motion to suppress, relying on Lynch v. State, 155 So. 99, 114 Fla. 599 (Fla.1934). In Lynch the sole issue on appeal was the sufficiency of the information upon which the conviction was based. In spite of the fact that the Attorney General conceded the insufficiency, the court found itself unable to consi…
-
Blacknell v. Barnes Detective Agency's Auto Recovery Bureau, Inc., 325 So. 2d 72 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed upon authority of the rule stated in Lynch v. State, 1934, 114 Fla. 839, 155 So. 99.…