WILLIAM BAKER, 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 court held that the defendant's retrial after his initial conviction was set aside did not constitute double jeopardy, and his arrest was lawful.
Defendant was convicted of robbery and sentenced to life imprisonment. His initial conviction and sentence were vacated, leading to a new trial where …
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 Reasonable Grounds For Arrest cases and more on FLexlaw
Ably represented by the Public Defender, the defendant William Baker was tried by jury and found guilty of the crime of robbery. Consequently upon judgment and sentence for life, he appeals.
The procedural aspects of the case disclose that the defendant was originally sentenced to twenty years upon a plea of guilty. Subsequently the defendant in pro-pria persona filed a motion to “quash charges.” The motion was treated as a petition for post-conviction relief under Criminal Procedure Rule No. 1; and the court, having concluded that the judgment and sentence were vulnerable to collateral attack, vacated judgment and sentence and ordered that the defendant be returned to St. Lucie County where he was tried on the pertinent information.
The defendant raises ten points on appeal. He first urges that after his initial *574judgment of conviction was set aside as^ void, the, new trial for the same offense placed him in double jeopardy. This is without merit. See Little v. Wainwright, Fla.1964, 161 So.2d 213.
The defendant next charges that he was arrested without probable cause. The record, however, discloses that the arresting officer had reasonable ground for believing that the defendant had committed or was committing a felony. See Melton v. State, Fla. 1954, 75 So.2d 291, 293; Section 901.15 Fla.Stat, F.S.A.
The remaining points are without merit. The cases cited by the defendant on those points either have no factual application or merely cite general rules of law the requirements of which have been met in this case. The judgment is accordingly affirmed.
Affirmed.
SMITH, C. J., and WHITE and ANDREWS, TJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Billingslea v. State, 176 So. 2d 379 (Fla. 2d DCA 1965)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Baker v. State, Fla.App. 1965, 175 So. 2d 573. Opinion filed May 21, 1965. SMITH, C. J., and SHANNON and ANDREWS, JJ., concur.…
-
Baker v. State, 180 So. 2d 656 (Fla. 1965)…Certiorari denied without opinion. 175 So. 2d 573.…
Authorities Cited
- Griffin v. State, 474 So. 2d 777 (Fla. 1985)
- Melton v. State, 75 So. 2d 291 (Fla. 1954)
- Little v. Louie L. Wainwright, 161 So. 2d 213 (Fla. 1964)