FRANK T. TRACEY, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
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 relinquished jurisdiction of an appeal to the trial court to clarify whether it had ruled on the constitutionality of a statute, as this determination was necessary for the appellate court to ascertain its own jurisdiction.
No, the Florida Supreme Court cannot entertain jurisdiction of an appeal if the record does not contain an order showing that the trial court directly passed upon the validity of the statute involved.
“Yet without the appearance in the record of an order showing that the trial court did directly pass upon the validity of the statute this Court cannot entertain jurisdiction of this appeal.”
Establishes the requirement for a clear record of the trial court's ruling on statutory validity for the Supreme Court to assume jurisdiction.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe appellant was appealing a decision, but the record did not clearly indicate whether the trial court had directly ruled on the constitutionality of…
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 Constitutional Validity cases and more on FLexlaw
This cause is identical in many respects to the case of Cohen v. State, Fla.1960, 121 So.2d 155.
As in the Cohen case, we are unable in this case to determine whether the trial court directly passed upon the validity of § 847.01, F.S.A., or construed a controlling provision of our state or federal constitutions.
Yet, as in the Cohen case, it seems to us that a determination of the validity of the statute involved was an essential first step to any proceedings following the filing of the motions to quash in this cause, and that therefore the trial court must have passed on the validity of the statute, and determined that it was constitutional.
Yet without the appearance in the record of an order showing that the trial court did directly pass upon the validity of the statute this Court cannot entertain jurisdiction of this appeal.
Therefore, for the reasons expressed in the Cohen case, supra, we do temporarily relinquish control of this cause to the trial court for the sole purpose of allowing that court to enter an order setting forth whether or not it passed on the validity of the statute involved herein as a prelude to the entry of the order denying the appellant’s motions to quash.
Upon the entry of such order by the trial court the clerk of that court is directed to forward a certified copy thereof to this Court and to the parties to this cause, whereupon this Court will determine whether the cause should be retained here or transferred to the proper district court of appeal.
It is so ordered.
THOMAS, C. J., and TERRELL, HOBSON and THORNAL, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Tracey v. State, 130 So. 2d 605 (Fla. 1961)
Authorities Cited
- Sol I. Cohen v. State, 121 So. 2d 155 (Fla. 1960)