DALE O. LAWRENCE, APPELLANT,
v.
THE 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 Escobedo rule does not apply retroactively in Florida.
Appellant sought to vacate his murder conviction and sentence, arguing for retroactive application of the Escobedo rule. The appellee moved to quash t…
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 Escobedo V. Illinois cases and more on FLexlaw
The appellant has appealed from an order denying his motion to vacate his judgment and sentence [murder in the first degree] under Criminal Procedure Rule No. One, F.S.A. ch. 924 Appendix. The appellee’s motion to quash is before us for determination.
It is admitted that in order for appellant to prevail, it would he necessary to apply the rule of Escobedo v. State of Illinois, 1964, 378 U.S. 478, 84 S.Ct. 1758, 12 L.Ed. 2d 977, retroactively.
We have heretofore held that the decision of Escobedo, supra, does not apply retroactively in Florida. Bell v. State, Fla.App.1965, 175 So.2d 80, cert. denied, Fla.1965, 183 So.2d 209 (opinion filed November 2, 1965, not yet reported), and Thompson v. State, Fla.App.1965, 176 So. 2d 564. See Linkletter v. Walker, 1965, 381 U.S. 618, 85 S.Ct. 1731, 14 L.Ed.2d 601; United States ex rel. Walden v. Pate, 7 Cir., 1965, 350 F.2d 240; United States ex rel. Conroy v. Pate, N.D.Ill.1965, 240-*468F.Supp. 237; Hayes v. United States, E.D. Mo.1964, 236 F.Supp. 225; Ruark v. People, Colo.1965, 405 P.2d 751; In re Lopez, 1965, 62 Cal.2d 368, 42 Cal.Rptr.2d 188, 398 P.2d 380; State v. Davis, 1965, 88 N.J. Super. 528, 212 A.2d 859; State v. Johnson, 1965, 43 N.J. 572, 206 A.2d 737; People v. Hovnanian, 1964, 22 App.Div.2d 686, 253 N.Y.S.2d 241; Levy, Realist Jurisprudence and Prospective Overruling, 109 U.Pa.L. Rev. 1.
The appellee’s motion to quash the appeal is therefore granted.
It is so ordered.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Carter v. State, 183 So. 2d 883 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966)…ate of Illinois, 378 U.S. 478, 84 S.Ct. 1758, 12 L.Ed.2d 977 (1964). The proposition announced in Escobedo does not have retroactive effect in the State of Florida'. Bell v. State, Fla.App.1965, 175 So. 2d 80; Lawrence v. State, [*884] Fla.App.1966, 182 So. 2d 467 [opinion filed February 8, 1966]. See also Taylor v. State, Fla.App.1964, 169 So. 2d 861; Lee v. State, Fla.App.1965, 173 So. 2d 520. Affirmed.…
Authorities Cited
- Escobedo v. Illinois, 378 U.S. 478 (U.S. 1964)
- Linkletter v. Walker, 381 U.S. 618 (U.S. 1965)
- Thompson v. State, 176 So. 2d 564 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965)
- United States ex rel. Oscar Walden, Jr. v. Pate, 350 F.2d 240 (7th Cir. 1965)
- Bell v. State, 175 So. 2d 80 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965)
- Blake v. State, 183 So. 2d 209 (Fla. 1965)
- Williams v. State, 183 So. 2d 209 (Fla. 1965)