STATE, EX REL. CURTIS HAMILTON,
v.
NATHAN MAYO, AS STATE PRISON CUSTODIAN, AND L. F. CHAPMAN, STATE PRISON SUPERINTENDENT
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.
A prisoner filed a habeas corpus petition challenging his two-year sentence for feloniously receiving stolen property. The Florida Supreme Court denied the petition, finding the conviction and sentence were lawful and properly imposed by a court of competent jurisdiction.
The habeas corpus petition is denied because the record shows the prisoner is lawfully held under a valid conviction and sentence imposed by a court of competent jurisdiction with constitutional authority to do so.
“where an application for writ of habeas corpus is made to this Court and the petition shows on its face that the alleged detention complained of is in conformity to a valid conviction and sentence, the writ itself may be denied on the face of the showing made, since no useful purpose would be served by the issuance of a habeas corpus that would merely result in a remand of the prisoner to custody”
Establishes the standard for dismissing habeas corpus petitions when detention is lawful
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceCurtis Hamilton was convicted by jury in the Court of Record of Escambia County on a charge of feloniously receiving stolen property valued at more th…
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 Jurisdiction Of Courts cases and more on FLexlaw
This is an application for habeas corpus addressed to this Court by a prisoner incarcerated in the State Prison. Attached to the petition for the writ are copies of *492the court proceedings under which petitioner was committed to serve a sentence of two years for the offense of feloniously receiving stolen property of the value of more than fifty dollars. Since petitioner is proceeding without the aid of counsel, we will dispose of the merits of the case absent the formal issuance and return of a writ of habeas corpus, the rule being well Settled that where an application for writ of habeas corpus is made to this Court and the petition shows on its face that the alleged detention complained of is in conformity to a valid conviction and sentence, the writ itself may be denied on the face of the showing made, since no useful purpose would be served by the issuance of a habeas corpus that would merely result in a remand of the prisoner to custody under the circumstances relied on for relief by such process. Lee v. Van Pelt, 57 Fla. 94, 48 Sou. Rep. 632; State, ex rel. Davis, v. Hardie, 108 Fla. 133, 146 Sou. Rep. 97; Shipper v. Schumacker, 118 Fla. 867, 160 Sou. Rep. 357.
The record shows' that the petitioner was informed against in the Court of Record of Escambia County, tried by a jury on a charge of felony, found guilty by the jury’s verdict and thereafter adjudged to be guilty and thereupon sentenced to a term of imprisonment that is within the limitations prescribed by law. Section 7239 C. G. L., 5138 R. G. S.
The contention that the Court of Record of Escambia County has no constitutional existence is obviously without merit. See Sections 39, 40 and 41, Article V, Constitution of Florida, as amended at the 1910 General Election. The Criminal Court of Record of Es'cambia County which now is possessed of all the powers of the original Criminal Court of Record as well as the additional powers provided for in the amendment to the Constitution hereinbefore referred to.
*493It affirmatively appears from the petition that the prisoner is being lawfully held and imprisoned in the State Prison under a lawful judgment of conviction and sentence of a court of competent jurisdiction, therefore the petition for writ of habeas corpus is denied on the authority of the case hereinbefore cited.
Habeas corpus application denied.
Whitfield, C. J., and Ellis, Terrell, Brown and Buford, J. J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State ex rel. George Couper Gibbs v. The Cir. Court, 140 Fla. 378 (Fla. 1939)…any proceding other than such as is directed by the appellate court will be prohibited. So, after a binding final judgment on appeal, the lower court may be prohibited from allowing the same matter to be relitigated. State ex rel. Hamilton v. Mayo, 123 Fla. 491, 167 So. 34; State ex rel. Davis v. Hardie, 108 Fla. 133, 146 So. 97; Lee v. Van Pelt, 57 Fla. 94, 48 So. 632. The rule nisi is made permanent. It is so ordered. Terrell, C. J., Whitman, Chapman and Thomas, J. J., concur. Justices Drown and Bufo…
-
Stafford Allison v. Baker, 152 Fla. 274 (Fla. 1943)…, 97 So. 317; Ex parte Hatcher, 86 Fla. 330, 98 So. 72; Bennett v. State, 86 Fla. 237, 118 So. 18; State ex rel. Price v. Stone, 128 Fla. 637, 175 So. 229. The answer, in part, to the contention swpra, is the case of State ex rel. Hamilton v. Mayo, 123 Fla. 491, 167 So. 34, and the authorities cited therein for the conclusion reached. While it is true that the petitioner was being detained as alleged in the petition for the writ, nevertheless the cause or reason for the detention or restraint was two-fold:…
-
Robert E. Banks v. Jones, 197 So. 3d 1152 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016)…against their will_ The purpose of the writ being to bring the petitioner before a court of competent judicial tribunal in order that inquiry may be made into the legality of his detention ....” (citations omitted)); State ex rel. Hamilton v. Mayo, 123 Fla. 491, 167 So. 34 (1936) (holding “the rule, being well settled that where an application for writ of habe-as corpus is made to this court and, the petition showing on its face -that the alleged detention complained of is in conformity to a valid convicti…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Skipper v. Doyle Schumacker, 118 Fla. 867 (Fla. 1933)
- State v. Hardie, 108 Fla. 133 (Fla. 1933)
- Lee v. Van Pelt, 57 Fla. 94 (Fla. 1909)
- State v. Hardie, 108 Fla. 437 (Fla. 1933)