RICHARD A. BARBER, PETITIONER,
v.
H. G. COCHRAN, JR., DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF CORRECTIONS, RESPONDENT

Fla. | 1961-02-08
THOMAS, C. J., and TERRELL, HOB-SON, THORNAL and O’CONNELL, JJ., concur.
126 So. 2d 738 Florida Supreme Court (1961)

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.

Synopsis

The Florida Supreme Court discharged a writ of habeas corpus for a petitioner who falsely claimed he was entitled to release because his sentence exceeded the maximum penalty for his crime. The court found the petitioner was actually charged with a more serious offense with a higher maximum penalty.


Holding

No, the petitioner was not entitled to discharge because his claim was based on a false representation of the charges and sentence he faced.


Key Quotes

“The above petitioner represented to this court that he was sentenced to serve six years for the commission of the crime of grand larceny and he contended that inasmuch as the maximum penalty for such an offense was five years, he was entitled to be discharged.”

Establishes the petitioner's claim for relief.

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

The petitioner claimed he was sentenced to six years for grand larceny, exceeding the five-year maximum penalty, and thus should be discharged. Howeve…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

The above petitioner represented to this court that he was sentenced to serve six years for the commission of the crime of grand larceny and he contended that inasmuch as the maximum penalty for such an offense was five years, he was entitled to be discharged.

It now appears that the statement was false and the contention unfounded. The record attached to the return of respondent shows that the petitioner was charged in an information with breaking and entering with intent to commit a felony, the maximum penalty for which is 15 years in the State prison.

*739It further appears that in the Second Count of the information he was' charged with grand larceny and found guilty of the offense but that the passage of sentence was deferred.

It is, therefore, ordered that the writ of habeas corpus he discharged.

THOMAS, C. J., and TERRELL, HOB-SON, THORNAL and O’CONNELL, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw