JOHNNIE LEE HARRIS, 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.
Johnnie Lee Harris was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to life imprisonment after a jury recommended mercy. Eight months after judgment, he filed a late notice of appeal, which the trial court treated as a motion under Criminal Procedure Rule 1 and summarily denied. The appellate court affirmed, finding all grounds for relief inadequate.
The court affirmed the trial court's denial of Harris's motion, finding that none of his grounds for relief had merit. Claims of insufficient evidence must be raised on direct appeal, not by post-conviction motion. Allegations of perjured testimony without showing prosecution knowledge do not state a valid ground under Rule 1. Suppression of evidence claims fail when the defendant was represented by counsel at trial who knew or should have known of the evidence.
“The contention that the evidence was insufficient to warrant conviction was a matter to be presented on an appeal, and not by motion to vacate.”
Establishes that inadequacy-of-evidence claims must be raised on direct appeal, not through post-conviction motions.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceHarris was indicted, tried, and convicted of first-degree murder. The jury recommended mercy and he received a life sentence. He was represented by ab…
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 Perjured Testimony cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellant was indicted, tried and convicted of first degree murder. The jury recommended mercy and he was sentenced to life imprisonment. At the trial he was represented by able counsel. No appeal was taken during the period allowed. However, some eight months after the judgment the defendant prepared and filed a notice of appeal which, when treated by the trial court as a motion under Criminal Procedure Rule 1, F.S.A. ch. 924 Appendix, was summarily denied. The matter is before us on the defendant’s appeal from the latter order.
We have considered the several grounds on which the judgment is attacked and find them to be without merit. The contention that the evidence was insufficient to warrant conviction was a matter to be presented on an appeal, and not by motion to vacate. Austin v. State, Fla.App. 1964, 160 So.2d 730. The contention that perjured testimony was given by a state’s witness, without showing knowledge thereof by the prosecution, did not state a ground for relief under Rule 1. Austin v. State, supra; Gammage v. State, Fla.App.1964, 162 So.2d 529; Byers v. State, Fla.App. 1964, 163 So.2d 57. The trial judge correctly rejected as insufficient the contention of suppression of certain evidence by the state, where it appeared that the defendant was represented at trial by counsel who knew or should have known of the evidence (said to have been presented on preliminary hear*313ing) and to have been in a position to have required its disclosure at trial. Federal Courts have so held in like circumstances. See Kyle v. United States, 2 Cir.1959, 266 F.2d 670; Goss v. United States, 6 Cir.1949, 179 F.2d 706.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Crusoe v. State, 183 So. 2d 600 (Fla. 2d DCA 1966)…e, Fla.App.1964, 168 So. 2d 325; Piehl v. State, Fla.App.1965, 173 So. 2d 723; Wilcox v. State, Fla.App.1965, 171 So. 2d 427; Taylor v. State, Fla.App.1965, 171 So. 2d 402; Mason v. State, Fla.App.1964, 167 So. 2d 618; Harris v. State, Fla.App.1964, 167 So. 2d 312; Mitchell v. State, Fla.App. 1964, 167 So. 2d 27. As to that quoted portion of the motion dealing with Court proceedings on June 5, 1964, such allegations either have no factual basis or are refuted by the certified record here. The record shows t…
-
Cash v. State, 207 So. 2d 18 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968)…104 So. 2d 789. Further, it is apparent that the prosecuting officials, even if perjury had existed [which was not shown] were not aware of such and, therefore, the appellant would not be entitled to the relief sought. Harris v. State, Fla.App.1964, 167 So. 2d 312; Smith v. State, Fla.App.1966, 191 So. 2d 618; Wade v. State, Fla.App.1967, 193 So. 2d 459. For the above stated reasons, the verdict, judgment and sentence here under review is hereby affirmed. Affirmed.…
-
Estevez v. State, 206 So. 2d 697 (Fla. 2d DCA 1968)…witness, on a material matter, known to be false by the prosecution officials, post-conviction relief may be had under Rule 1. Smith v. State, Fla.App.1966, 191 So. 2d 618; Wade v. State, Fla.App.1967, 193 So. 2d 459; Harris v. State, Fla.App.1964, 167 So. 2d 312; Ingrim v. State, Fla.App.1964, 166 So. 2d 805; Austin v. State, Fla.App.1964, 160 So. 2d 730; Hall v. State, Fla.App.1964, 162 So. 2d 324; Byers v. State, Fla.App.1964, 163 So. 2d 57; and Gilliard v. State, Fla.App.1965, 171 So. 2d 902. There is no…
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
- Austin v. State, 160 So. 2d 730 (Fla. 2d DCA 1964)
- Bruce Hinson Gammage and Larry v. Gysin, 162 So. 2d 529 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964)
- Alastair Kyle v. United States, 266 F.2d 670 (2d Cir. 1959)
- Byers v. State, 163 So. 2d 57 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964)
- Goss v. United States, 179 F.2d 706 (6th Cir. 1949)