MACIO BERNARD SIMPSON, APPELLANT,
v.
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.
This case involves a defendant appealing a conviction. The Supreme Court of the United States vacated the prior judgment of the Florida District Court of Appeal and remanded the case for reconsideration in light of the Supreme Court's ruling in Ashe v. Swenson, which established principles of collateral estoppel in criminal cases.
The court adopted the judgment of the Supreme Court of the United States, vacating its prior decision. The case was remanded to the lower court to determine if a rational jury could have grounded its verdict on an issue other than that which the defendant sought to foreclose, applying the principles of collateral estoppel.
[1] A state appellate court must vacate its prior judgment and adopt the judgment of the United States Supreme Court when the Supreme Court remands the case for reconsiderati…
[2] A state appellate court, upon remand from the United States Supreme Court, must direct the trial court to conduct an adversary proceeding to determine if a rational jury…
Previewing 2 of 3 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“Whereas, the mandate of the Supreme Court of the United States has been filed with this Court, which said mandate was predicated upon the order and judgment of the Supreme Court of the United States, entered June 14, 1971, 403 U.S. 384, 91 S.Ct. 1801, 29 L.Ed.2d 549, which said judgment vacated the judgment of this Court first above mentioned and remanded the case to this Court for consideration in light of Ashe v. Swenson, 397 U.S. 436, 90 S.Ct. 1189, 25 L.Ed.2d 469, accordingly,”
Establishes the basis for the current court's reconsideration of the case, specifically the U.S. Supreme Court's action and the directive to consider Ashe v. Swenson.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellant Macio Bernard Simpson was convicted in the Criminal Court of Record for Duval County. The Florida District Court of Appeal affirmed this con…
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 Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw
Whereas, the judgment and decision of this Court in this cause was filed August 4, 1970, and reported in 237 So.2d 341, wherein the judgment of the Criminal Court of Record for Duval County was affirmed; and
Whereas, said decision and judgment was declined review by the Supreme Court of Florida by certiorari proceedings, 240 So.2d 645; and
Whereas, in the October Term, 1970, the said cause came on to be heard before the Supreme Court of the United States on petition for writ of certiorari to this Court and response thereto; and
Whereas, the mandate of the Supreme Court of the United States has been filed with this Court, which said mandate was predicated upon the order and judgment of the Supreme Court of the United States, entered June 14, 1971, 403 U.S. 384, 91 S.Ct. 1801, 29 L.Ed.2d 549, which said judgment vacated the judgment of this Court first above mentioned and remanded the case to this Court for consideration in light of Ashe v. Swenson, 397 U.S. 436, 90 S.Ct. 1189, 25 L.Ed.2d 469, accordingly,
The judgment and opinion of this Court filed August 4, 1970, is set aside and held for naught, and the opinion and judgment of the Supreme Court of the United States filed June 14, 1971, is adopted as this Court’s opinion and judgment and the same shall accompany the mandate of this Court to the Criminal Court of Record for Duval County; and, accordingly,
The Criminal Court of Record for Duval County is directed to hold an adversary proceeding for the purpose of examining the record of the prior proceeding against appellant herein and to take into account the pleadings, evidence, charge, and other relevant matter, and conclude whether a rational jury could have grounded its verdict upon an issue other than that which the defendant seeks to foreclose from consideration in the instant proceeding, which *657said examination shall be in accordance with and for the purpose of the principles set forth in Ashe v. Swenson, supra, and for such further proceedings as may be deemed appropriate in the premises.
SPECTOR, C. J., and WIGGINTON and CARROLL, DONALD, K., JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Ashe v. Swenson, 397 U.S. 436 (U.S. 1970)
- Macio Bernard Simpson v. State, 237 So. 2d 341 (Fla. 1st DCA 1970)
- Jaye-Ron Corp. v. Pozin, 240 So. 2d 645 (Fla. 1970)
- Macio Bernard Simpson v. State, 240 So. 2d 645 (Fla. 1970)