JOHN D. CHAMPLIN, PETITIONER,
v.
H. G. COCHRAN, JR., DIRECTOR DIVISION OF CORRECTIONS, STATE OF FLORIDA, AND JOHN KIRK, AS SHERIFF OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, RESPONDENTS
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.
Champlin sought habeas corpus release after conviction for child molestation, challenging the validity of his conviction based on the county solicitor's failure to attach an oath to the information. The Florida Supreme Court held that the oath requirement, though constitutional, is a matter of form that may be waived by failure to raise timely objection, and Champlin's delay in raising the issue until appeal was fatal to relief.
The oath requirement to an information is a matter of form designed to secure prosecutorial good faith, not an essential element of the charge itself. Such defects may be waived by failure to make timely objection or by pleading to the merits. Objections to formal defects in an information must be raised by motion to quash prior to trial, and failure to timely raise such objections, particularly at the appeal stage, is fatal to any relief.
“the principal reason for this requirement is merely to secure good faith on the part of the prosecuting officer. The affidavit is not a part of the charge or the statement of the accusation against the defendant.”
Establishes that the oath is a procedural safeguard, not substantive to the charge, and therefore may be waived
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceChamplin was convicted of an offense under the child molester law after trial on a plea of not guilty. The county solicitor failed to verify the infor…
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 Information (Criminal Pleading) cases and more on FLexlaw
Petitioner Champlin seeks a writ of habeas corpus to obtain his release from imprisonment in the County jail of Palm Beach County.
We must determine whether the failure of a county solicitor to attach an oath to a information is fatal to a conviction after a plea of not guilty and a trial on the merits.
Champlin was convicted of an offense under the child molester law. He appealed to the Court of Appeal, Second District. The judgment of conviction was affirmed. Champlin v. State, 122 So.2d 412. By this original proceeding for a writ of habeas corpus petitioner points out that the county solicitor failed to verify the information filed against him as required by Section 10 of the Declaration of Rights, and, Article V, Section 9(5), Florida Constitution, F.S. A. No attack was made on the information before or during the trial. The initial assault was made in the District Court of Appeal. Having failed there, the petitioner now contends that the requirement of the oath is essential to the validity of an information and that an unsworn information could not possibly sustain a conviction.
To support his claim the petitioner relies-on a statement in Holland v. State, 83 Fla. 400, 91 So. 379. This Court did make reference to Section 10 of the Declaration-of Rights as it read prior to its amendment in 1934. The opinion stated that this section constituted an organic command and' not merely a waiveable constitutional right. This language in Holland v. State, supra,, was totally unnecessary to the decision and should be disregarded as obiter dictum.. To the extent that the aforementioned language in Holland v. State appears to conflict with anything we now hold, the former language shall hereafter be disregarded.
We think it clear that the principal reason for this requirement is merely to-secure good faith on the part of the prosecuting officer. The affidavit is not a part of the charge or the statement of the accusation against the defendant. Being a matter of form a defective affidavit, or the total absence of an affidavit as here, may be waived by failure to make timely objection or by a plea to the merits. Bryan v. State, 41 Fla. 643, 26 So. 1022.
This court has consistently discouraged a policy of delaying objections to matters of form until the late stages of a criminal case. An obj ection of the nature now under consideration should be made by an appropriate motion to quash prior to the trial. This gives the trial judge and the prosecuting official an opportunity to correct the defect without harm or embarrassment to the defendant. This procedure also avoids the delay and expense that would be attendant upon the granting of such a motion in the late stages of the trial. Certainly, a delay in urging the objection until an appeal or a post conviction habeas corpus proceeding is fatal to any relief that might otherwise be given. Sawyer v. State, 94 Fla. 60, 113 So. 736; Suarez v. State, 95 Fla. 42, 115 So. 519; Young v. State, 97 Fla. 214, 121 So. 468, 27 Am.Jur. 734, Indictments and Information, Section 305 C; People ex rel. Fensky v. Leinecke, Sheriff, 290 Ill. 560, 125 N.E. 513; Abbott *567Bros. v. United States, 7 Cir., 242 F. 751; Simpson v. United States, 6 Cir., 241 F. 841. We have considered the matter on the petition and brief of the petitioner. We have also heard oral arguments by counsel. The petition is without merit and the writ is denied.
It is so ordered.
THOMAS, C. J., and TERRELL, HOBSON and O’CONNELL, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Jordan v. State, 136 So. 2d 367 (Fla. 1st DCA 1962)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed on authority of Sawyer v. State, 94 Fla. 60, 113 So. 736 (1927); Champlin v. Cochran, Fla.1960, 125 So. 2d 565. CARROLL, DONALD K., Chief Judge, and WIGGINTON and RAWLS, JJ., concur.…
-
State v. Will Beacham Perkins, 977 So. 2d 643 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008)…rein provided, shall be entered after the defendant pleads to the merits. It has long been Florida law that technical deficiencies or defects in form may be waived by failure to make timely objection or by a plea to the merits. Champlin v. Cochran, 125 So. 2d 565 (Fla.1961); Bryan v. State, 41 Fla. 643, 26 So. 1022 (1899). Rule 3.140(g) adopts this law in connection with, issues relating:to signing and verifying informations. [*646] The contention that a defendant can plead to an information, yet nevertheles…
-
Gerlaugh v. Fla. Parole Comm'n, 139 So. 2d 888 (Fla. 1962)…on, identical. . Segars v. State, 94 Fla. 1128, 115 So. 537. . Young v. State, 97 Fla. 214, 121 So. 468. . State ex rel. Ricks v. Davidson, 121 Fla. 196, 163 So. 588. . Carson v. Mayo, 128 Fla. 247, 174 So. 416. . Champlin v. Cochran, Fla.1960, 125 So. 2d 565. . Jordan v. State, Fla.App.1962. 136 So. 2d 367. . See footnote 3, supra.…
Previewing 3 of 10 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Emelio Suarez v. State, 95 Fla. 42 (Fla. 1928)
- Vazquez v. Ailyn M. Rebaza Smith (Fla. 3d DCA 2021)
- Sawyer v. State, 94 Fla. 60 (Fla. 1927)
- Gadsden D. Bryan v. State, 41 Fla. 643 (Fla. 1899)
- Champlin v. State, 122 So. 2d 412 (Fla. 2d DCA 1960)
- Young v. State, 97 Fla. 214 (Fla. 1929)
- H. A. Thomas and his wife v. Inv. Co., 83 Fla. 400 (Fla. 1922)
- Holland v. State, 83 Fla. 400 (Fla. 1922)