EVIE JEAN NIX, PETITIONER,
v.
DUKE MCCALLISTER, SHERIFF OF SUWANNEE COUNTY, FLORIDA, RESPONDENT

Fla. 1st DCA | 1967-08-31
No. J-191
WIGGINTON, C. J., and RAWLS and JOHNSON, JJ., concur.
202 So. 2d 1 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (1967) Positive Treatment
Cited by 4 cases

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.

Synopsis

Evie Jean Nix petitioned for habeas corpus seeking bail after being denied bail pending retrial following a mistrial in a first-degree murder case. The Florida District Court of Appeal held that the circumstantial evidence of guilt did not meet the constitutional standard required to deny bail, and ordered that Nix be released on bail pending her retrial.


Holding

The court held that Nix is entitled to bail pending retrial. The evidence of guilt, being wholly circumstantial, does not measure up to the constitutional standard required to deny bail under Section 9 of the Florida Constitution's Declaration of Rights, which requires proof to be evident or the presumption great for capital offenses.


Key Quotes

“To deny bail to one otherwise entitled thereto is a deprivation of constitutional rights and due process of law.”

Establishes the fundamental constitutional protection regarding bail for those entitled to it.

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

Nix was arrested on August 17, 1966, and charged with first-degree murder. She was indicted and tried in Circuit Court for Suwannee County, but the tr…

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.

Petitioner filed in this court a -petition for writ of habeas corpus alleging that she is now and has been confined in the county jail of Suwannee County continuously since the time of her arrest on August 17, 1966, upon a charge of murder in the first degree ; that she was indicted by a grand jury and was tried for first degree murder in the Circuit Court of Suwannee County which resulted in a mistrial on July 13, 1967. Following her mistrial it is alleged that she applied to the Circuit Court for an order allowing bail pending her subsequent trial which has not yet been scheduled, which application was denied.

Section 9 of the Declaration of Rights of the Florida Constitution, F.S.A. provides that all persons shall be bailable by sufficient sureties except for capital offenses where the proof is evident or the presumption great. .To deny bail to one otherwise entitled thereto is a deprivation of constitutional rights and due process of law.

It appears to be an accepted principle of law that a mistrial does not establish per se that an accused is entitled to bail, *2but is a factor which may be considered by the court in exercising its discretion as to the admission of the prisoner to bail pending his subsequent trial.1

We have carefully reviewed the transcript of the trial proceedings which resulted in the mistrial of the charge against petitioner and are pursuaded to the view that the evidence of guilt is wholly circumstantial and does not measure up to that standard required to justify the denial of bail pending retrial.

In State ex rel. Hyde v. Thursby2 this court had occasion to review an order denying habeas corpus sought on the ground that one charged with a capital offense had been wrongfully denied the right to bail pending trial. In that case this court, speaking through Judge Johnson, said:

“At this point in the proceedings, the only evidence of the State is circumstantial, and as such it is necessary to be more than a suspicion. It must exclude every other hypotheses except that of guilt [Mayo v. State, 71 So.2d 899 (Fla.1954)]. The Supreme Court of Florida has held in Russell v. State, 71 Fla. 236, 71 So. 27 (Fla.1916), that the evidence must be stronger than beyond a reasonable doubt to prevent bail being afforded pursuant to Section 9, Declaration of Rights.”

From our review of the record in this case, and upon consideration of the principles of law guiding our decision, we hold that petitioner is entitled to bail pending retrial of the charge against her. Petitioner is allowed ten .days from the date of this decision within which to renew her application to the trial court for an order allowing bail in such reasonable amount as may be determined by that court, in default of which the petition filed herein shall stand dismissed. If upon consideration of such application it is again denied, then the respondent herein, as Sheriff of Suwannee County, is ordered and directed to release petitioner from custody pending her retrial on the indictment against her. Jurisdiction of this cause is reserved for the entry of such other and further orders as may be deemed necessary and expedient.

WIGGINTON, C. J., and RAWLS and JOHNSON, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Preston v. Sheriff David GEE, 133 So. 3d 1218 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014)
    …ing that circumstantial evidence of accused’s guilt that did not exclude hypotheses of innocence failed to exceed the “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard, and so was insufficient to deprive him of his right to pretrial release); Nix v. McCallister, 202 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 1st DCA 1967) (same). All in all, the CRA in this case contained little more than a recitation of broad, conclusory allegations by persons unnamed. As such, it was insufficient and incompetent to support a finding that the proof of Preston’s…
  • Sirianni v. Coleman, 379 So. 2d 176 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980)
    …defendant does not carry that burden simply by showing that her first trial resulted in a mistrial; the mistrial is merely one of the many factors to be considered by the trial judge in determining whether bail should be granted. Nix v. McCallister, 202 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 1st DCA, 1967). There is an excellent discussion of the history of bail in capital cases to be found in Arthur v. Harper, 371 So. 2d 96 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978). There the court also held that a defendant charged with a capital or life felony had…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw