HORACE LEROY MADDOX, PETITIONER,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENT

Fla. 1st DCA | 1972-06-27
No. R-152
SPECTOR, C. J., and WIGGINTON, J., concur.
264 So. 2d 34 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (1972)

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

Maddox sought habeas corpus relief challenging his 1968 arrest for vagrancy and murder, his delayed indictment notification (November 1968 to February 1969), and the late appointment of counsel. The court upheld his second-degree murder conviction and life sentence, finding any due process defect waived by his proceeding to trial with competent counsel.


Holding

The court denied the habeas petition, holding that any due process defect was waived when Maddox proceeded to trial represented by competent counsel and that the delays in indictment notification and appointment of counsel did not entitle him to relief.


Headnotes

[1] A defendant waives claims of due process violations or lateness in the appointment of counsel by proceeding to trial represented by competent counsel.

[2] A delay in indictment and appointment of counsel does not entitle a defendant to relief if they proceed to trial with competent legal representation.

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

Key Quotes

“By going to trial, represented by very competent counsel, any complaint about due process or lateness in appointment of counsel, was waived.”

Establishes the court's central holding that proceeding to trial with competent counsel waives earlier procedural defects regarding appointment of counsel

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

Maddox was arrested on August 9, 1968, on vagrancy charges and for investigation of robbery and murder, but was not provided an attorney. He was indic…

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
JOHNSON, Judge.

JOHNSON, Judge.

This is a petition for writ of habeas corpus, in which the petitioner is, at this late date, complaining of the fact that he had been arrested on August 9, 1968, and booked on a charge of vagrancy and for investigation of charge of robbery and murder, but was not furnished an attorney; was indicted on November 1, 1968 for first degree murder, but was not informed of the indictment until February 9, 1969, at which time the circuit court appointed the public defender’s office to defend the petitioner. His trial was had about June 30, 1969, at which he was convicted of second degree murder and sentenced to life imprisonment.

This conviction and sentence was appealed to this court and affirmed by this court by opinion filed June 16, 1970. The As*35sistant Public Defender who represented the appellant at his trial and his appeal to this court, was the Honorable Gerald Sohn. This counsel is generally recognized as an astute criminal trial lawyer, and we are of the opinion that the appellant (petitioner) was well-represented at his trial and that all justiciable defenses were raised at trial as well as on appeal, which have been decided adversely to the appellant. The record of the appeal which is lodged in this court, as well as the petition in this cause, does not reveal that due process was denied the appellant (petitioner), and the fact that he was held in jail for about sixty days before he was indicted and no notice of indictment given, nor counsel appointed until February 9, 1969, does not entitle the appellant to the relief he desires. By going to trial, represented by very competent counsel, any complaint about due process or lateness in appointment of counsel, was waived. The petition filed here does not overcome this waiver.

The petition is therefore denied.

SPECTOR, C. J., and WIGGINTON, J., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw