LEO FRANK LAND, PETITIONER,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENT

Fla. | 1965-06-23
No. 34181
DREW, C. J., and THOMAS, ROBERTS, CALDWELL and ERVIN, JJ., concur.
176 So. 2d 902 Florida Supreme Court (1965)

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.


Holding

The court held that the petitioner was represented by counsel and his petition for a writ of habeas corpus was without merit.


Facts & Procedural History

Petitioner, convicted of manslaughter, filed a motion to vacate his sentence, alleging he was not represented by counsel. The trial court denied the m…

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.

Leo Frank Land, petitioner, convicted of manslaughter and sentenced to fifteen years’ hard labor, filed a motion to vacate and set aside his judgment and sentence on the ground he had not been represented by counsel. The court found that the defendant, at the times of arraignment, plea and trial, was, according to the record and circuit court minutes, represented by competent counsel, and denied the motion.

Petitioner alleges he was not, for a period of seven months following the entry of the above order, advised as to the disposition of his motion and that, by the time he was so advised, the time for appeal had passed. Petitioner asserts that, because of these circumstances, he now has the right to have the merits of his cause considered on petition for writ of habeas corpus in this court. We issued the writ and have examined the return which alleges affirmatively petitioner was represented by counsel of his own choosing at his arraignment and trial. Included as exhibits in the return are photostatic copies of the record establishing that fact.

Upon consideration of the record in this cause we find the petition to be without merit. The writ is discharged and petitioner remanded to custody.

It is so ordered.

DREW, C. J., and THOMAS, ROBERTS, CALDWELL and ERVIN, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw