STATE, EX REL, JOHN SPITZER,
v.
NATHAN MAYO, AS CUSTODIAN OF STATE PRISON
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.
In this habeas corpus proceeding, the Florida Supreme Court addressed whether a petitioner's conviction and sentence were void due to the unconstitutional enactment of the statute under which he was charged. The Court held that although the 1927 Act was void, the underlying informations sufficiently charged the offense under the valid predecessor statute, but the sentence was void because no judgment of conviction was ever entered.
The Court held that although Chapter 12246, Acts of 1927 was void, the informations sufficiently charged the offense under the valid predecessor statute (Section 5055 R.G.S. 1920), so the prosecution was lawfully conducted. However, the sentence was void because no judgment of conviction was ever entered against the defendant, making the sentence unauthorized and improper.
“[QUOTE REDACTED — failed verbatim audit (paraphrase, not verbatim). See original_text for the text as originally displayed.]”
Establishes that when an unconstitutional statute is void, the prior valid statute it replaced remains operative.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceJohn Spitzer was informed against in Hillsborough County Criminal Court under four informations, each charging robbery while armed with a dangerous we…
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 Judgment Of Conviction cases and more on FLexlaw
This is an original proceeding in habeas corpus. Petitioner was informed against in the Criminal Court of Record of Hillsborough County under four in-formations each charging a robbery when armed with a dangerous weapon and with the intent to then and there, if resisted, kill or maim the person robbed.
To each information the petitioner pleaded guilty and was sentenced under each plea to serve life imprisonment in the State Prison. ■
His contention now is that at the time he was informed against it was assumed that Chapter 12246, Acts of 1927, was valid and that the information was filed under the provisions of that Act and that as that Act was held to be void because not enacted in accordance with Article III, Section 17, of the Constitution, the entire proceedings against the petitioner were void and of no effect.
It is true that Chapter 12246, Acts of 1927, was held to be void because it was never enacted as required by the. Constitution. Wood, et al., v. State, 98 Fla. 703, 124 Sou. 44. It, therefore, follows that the purported enactment *428•had no force and effect whatever and Section 5055 R. G. S. 1920 remained in full force and effect.
The informations under attack here sufficiently charge the 'offense attempted to be charged under the provisions of 'Section 5055 R. G. S. 1920 and the prosecution in law, regardless of what the intent of those conducting it may have been, was a prosecution under the valid existing statute.
The petitioner, however, raises the further contention that there w.as no judgment of conviction entered against the defendant upon which to base any sentence. This contention the record shows to be correct. Therefore, the sentence imposed was not only void becaus'e it was unauthorized under the provisions of Section 5055 R. G. S., but was also not based upon a judgment of conviction.
It, therefore, follows that petitioner must be ordered delivered by the respondent to the Sheriff of Hillsborough County to be there presented at the next general or special term of the Court having jurisdiction to enter judgment against the defendant upon his plea of guilty, there to receive the judgment and sentence of the Court. State, ex rel. House, v. Mayo, 122 Fla. 23, 164 Sou. 673, and cases there cited.
It is so ordered.
Ellis, C. J., and Terrell, J., concur.
Whitfield, P. J., and Brown and Chapman, J. J., concur in the opinion and judgment.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Gazda, 257 So. 2d 242 (Fla. 1971)…Ellis v. State, 100 Fla. 27, 30, 129 So. 106, 108 (1930) : “[T]his court is firmly committed to the doctrine that a legal conviction of crime includes a judgment of the court as well as a plea or verdict of guilty.” . State ex rel. Spitzer v. Mayo, 129 Fla. 426, 176 So. 434 (1937) ; Finch v. Mayo, 137 Fla. 762, 189 So. 27 (1939). . Fla.Stat. § 921.01, F.S.A.: “Judgment defined. — -The term judgment as used in the criminal procedure law means the adjudication by the court that the defendant is guilty or no…
-
State of Fla. ex rel. Jeffrey Michael Boyd v. Green, 355 So. 2d 789 (Fla. 1978)…d? We answer this question in the affirmative. Where a repealing act is adjudged unconstitutional, the statute (or in this case the rule) it attempts to repeal remains in force. Re: Advisory Opinion to Governor, supra, State ex rel. Spitzer v. Mayo, 129 Fla. 426, 176 So. 434 (1937), and Messer v. Jackson, 126 Fla. 678, 171 So. 660 (1936). We hold that Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.210 is in effect and governs the trial of criminal cases in which an insanity defense is presented. Accordingly, the order of the trial court…
-
Finch v. Hon. Nathan Mayo, 137 Fla. 762 (Fla. 1939)…ct is adequate to support a judgment of conviction but there must be a judgment of conviction to support a sentence. See Ex parte Ferris, 111 Fla. 584, 149 Sou. 580; Anderson v. Chapman, 109 Fla. 54, 146 Sou. 675; State ex rel v. Mayo, 129 Fla. 428, 176 Sou. 434; Lewis v. Mayo, 127 Fla. 488, 173 Sou. 346. [*764] Petitioner also shows that he began his service of sentence in the State Prison in April, 1928; that after serving thirteen days he was committed to the Florida State Hospital for the Insane and was…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- State v. Mayo, 122 Fla. 23 (Fla. 1935)
- McCay v. Seaver, 98 Fla. 710 (Fla. 1929)
- Wood v. State, 98 Fla. 703 (Fla. 1929)
- State v. State Racing Comm'n, 122 Fla. 21 (Fla. 1935)