THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
MARGARET GARTENMAYER, 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 record was not sufficient to demonstrate error in the trial court's findings of fact or its determination of applicable law regarding the dismissal of the information.
The state appealed an order dismissing an information charging the appellee with corruptly influencing voting. The trial court granted the appellee's …
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 Grand Jury Proceedings cases and more on FLexlaw
The state appeals an order dismissing an information in two counts against the ap-pellee, charging her with the crime of corruptly influencing voting, in violation of section 104.061(2) Fla.Stat., F.S.A. The information was filed in the Criminal Court of Record of Monroe County. It was filed pursuant to a true bill of the Grand Jury filed October 17, 1968.
The order of the trial court granted ap-pellee’s motion to dismiss by way of plea in abatement. In so doing and as a bases therefor the court adopted findings of fact. One of the findings was that unauthorized persons were present during regular term of the grand jury. The court further found that this violation of the statutes (See Section 905.17 Fla.Stat., F.S.A.) rendered the subsequent indictment subject to being quashed upon a proper motion, citing State ex rel. Losey v. Willard, Fla.1951, 54 So.2d 183.
The state’s single point upon appeal argues that the record was not sufficient to support the findings of fact. Our review of the record convinces us that the state has failed to carry the burden of demonstrating error in either the trial court’s findings of fact or his determination of the applicable law.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
The Honorable John A. Rudd & the Honorable Ben C. Willis v. State of Fla. ex rel. Floyd T. Christian, 310 So. 2d 295 (Fla. 1975)…e presence of unauthorized persons in the Grand Jury room in violation of statutory authority constitutes grounds for dismissal or quashal of the indictment. (State v. Papy, Fla.App. 3rd 1970, 239 So. 2d 604; State v. Gartenmayer, Fla.App. 3rd 1970, 239 So. 2d 116 and State ex rel. Losey v. Willard, Sup.Ct. Fla.1951, 54 So. 2d 183. See also annotation in 4 A.L.R.2d at page 392 et seq.).” While the presence in the Grand Jury room of persons other than those specifically authorized by statute is highly irregul…
-
State of Fla. ex rel. Floyd T. Christian v. The Honorable John A. Rudd & the Honorable Ben C. Willis, 302 So. 2d 821 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974)…the presence of unauthorized persons in the Garnd Jury room in violation of statutory authority constitutes grounds for dismissal or quashal of the indictment. (State v. Papy, Fla.App.3rd 1970, 239 So. 2d 604; State v. Gartenmayer, Fla.App.3rd 1970, 239 So. 2d 116 and State ex rel. Losey v. Willard, Sup.Ct.Fla.1951, 54 So. 2d 183. See also annotation in 4 A.L.R.2d at page 392 et seq.) In the case sub judice we not only have the presence of unauthorized persons in the Grand Jury room but we also have their ac…
Authorities Cited
- State Ex Rel. Losey v. Willard, 54 So.2d 183 (Fla. 1951)