JACK CURTIS HIGGINBOTHAM, 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.
A minor defendant appealed his conviction for breaking and entering, arguing the state failed to notify his mother of the initial criminal proceedings as required by Florida statute. The court held that the failure to provide statutory notice to the parents of an unmarried minor prior to trial constitutes reversible error and vacated the conviction.
The court held that the proceedings on May 22, 1969 at which the defendant pled guilty and was found guilty constituted the trial, and the state's failure to notify the defendant's parents of that charge prior to trial constitutes reversible error requiring reversal and remand.
[1] A statute requiring due notice to parents of an unmarried minor charged with a crime must be strictly complied with prior to trial.
[2] Failure to provide due notice to the parents of an unmarried minor defendant prior to trial constitutes reversible error.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“We hold that the proceedings on May 22, 1969 at which the defendant pled guilty and was found guilty constituted the trial in this cause and that the failure of the state to notify the parents of the minor defendant of that charge prior to trial constitutes reversible error.”
Establishes the core holding that failure to notify parents of an unmarried minor's trial is reversible error
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceHigginbotham, an unmarried minor living with his mother, pleaded guilty on May 22, 1969 to breaking and entering with intent to commit a misdemeanor. …
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.
Defendant, an unmarried minor who lived with his mother, was charged with a *541crime. On May 22, 1969, he pleaded guilty to the charge of breaking and entering with intent to commit a misdemeanor. He testified; the court found him guilty as charged but withheld entry of an adjudication of guilt and placed him on probation for two years. The defendant’s mother was not properly notified of these proceedings.
Subsequently, defendant was charged with the crime of breaking and entering an automobile with intent to commit grand larceny and his mother was duly notified of this charge. He entered a plea of guilty to the crime of trespass and the court adjudicated him guilty and imposed sentence.
Defendant was then charged with violation of probation and his mother was present at the hearing on this charge. His probation was revoked and he was adjudicated guilty of breaking and entering with intent to commit petty larceny and sentenced for a term of two years in the State Penitentiary.
Defendant appeals from the last judgment and conviction of sentence and asserts that the state’s failure to comply with the requirements of § 932.38, Fla.Stat., F. S.A., constitutes reversible error. The statute requires that due notice of criminal charges shall be given to the parents of an unmarried minor prior to the trial.
We hold that the proceedings on May 22, 1969 at which the defendant pled guilty and was found guilty constituted the trial in this cause and that the failure of the state to notify the parents of the minor defendant of that charge prior to trial constitutes reversible error. See Kinard v. Cochran, Fla.1959, 113 So.2d 843; Johnson v. Cochran, Fla.1960, 124 So.2d 488; Bell v. State, Fla.App.1966, 188 So.2d 565; Brooks v. State, Fla.App.1966, 183 So.2d 550; and Milligan v. State, Fla.App.1965, 177 So.2d 75.
Accordingly, the judgment and sentence of the defendant, Higginbotham, was null and void because of the failure of the state to comply with § 932.38, Fla.Stat., F.S.A. The judgment and sentence for the crime of breaking and entering with intent to commit petty larceny be and the same is hereby reversed and the cause is remanded for further action consistent herewith.
It is so ordered.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
King v. State, 281 So. 2d 612 (Fla. 2d DCA 1973)…ly upon the stated word of the appellant that he tried to contact them and was unable to do so. The failure to notify the parents of the appellant of the charge against their son constituted reversible error. See Higginbotham v. State, Fla.App.1971, 248 So. 2d 540, and the cases cited therein. Accordingly, for the reasons aforesaid, the judgment and sentence appealed from is reversed and the cause remanded for new trial in accordance with due process of law. It is so ordered. MANN, C. J., and HOBSON, J., c…
Authorities Cited
- Milligan v. State, 177 So. 2d 75 (Fla. 2d DCA 1965)
- Kinard v. Cochran, 113 So. 2d 843 (Fla. 1959)
- Johnson v. Cochran, 124 So. 2d 488 (Fla. 1960)
- Bell v. State, 188 So. 2d 565 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966)
- Ervin Albert Brooks v. State, 183 So. 2d 550 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966)