JOHN ALLEN MITCHELL, 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.
The court held that an appeal from a judgment of conviction may be dismissed if the appellant has escaped lawful custody and is at large.
Appellant was convicted of first-degree murder and appealed. While the appeal was pending, the appellant escaped from jail and his whereabouts became …
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 Escape From Custody cases and more on FLexlaw
ON MOTION TO DISMISS
Appellant seeks review of a judgment of conviction and sentence based upon a jury verdict finding him guilty of murder in the first degree, with a recommendation of mercy. He is represented on this appeal by court-appointed counsel, and the cause was set for oral argument before the court on November 14, 1972.
Prior to the date on which the appeal was to be heard appellee filed in the cause a motion to dismiss the appeal on the ground that appellant had escaped on October 22, 1972, from the jail in which he was incarcerated and his whereabouts are presently unknown. It has been held by the appellate courts of this state that, in the exercise of its discretion, the court may decline to hear or consider an appeal from a judgment of conviction and sentence under circumstances where the appellant has escaped from lawful custody and is at large at the time the case is scheduled for hearing before the court.1 The facts alleged in appellee’s motion to dismiss have been substantiated by communications received from the penal authorities and are not disputed by appel*448lant. For the ¡foregoing reasons, the motion of appellee is granted and the appeal shall stand dismissed.
It was because of appellant’s insolvency that counsel was appointed by the court to represent him on this appeal. Counsel has discharged his obligations in a skillful and workmanlike manner and has filed in the cause a brief which, under normal circumstances, would command the careful attention and studied consideration of this court. Appellant’s counsel is in no way responsible for the escape which brings about the dismissal of this appeal, and he is hereby discharged from any further duties or obligations in connection herewith.
CARROLL, DONALD K., Acting C. J., WIGGINTON, and RAWLS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Cornell Chambers v. State, 391 So. 2d 352 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980)…tate moved to dismiss his appeal. That motion was granted by this Court and we dismissed the appeal in Case No. 79-93 on May 16, 1980, citing three cases in support of that order: Jones v. State, 362 So. 2d 149 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978); Mitchell v. State, 270 So. 2d 447 (Fla. 1st DCA 1972); and Decree v. State, 180 So. 2d 667 (Fla. 1st DCA 1965). Subsequent to the dismissal of defendant’s appeal of his judgment of conviction, he was apprehended and sentenced on August 15, 1980, to 15 years imprisonment. He again f…
Authorities Cited
- Bretti v. State, 210 So. 2d 472 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968)
- Wingard v. State, 210 So. 2d 472 (Fla. 2d DCA 1968)
- In re Tr. under the Will of Edward Thomas, 180 So. 2d 667 (Fla. 1st DCA 1965)