WILLIAM KENNEDY
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA
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.
William Kennedy was convicted of assault with intent to kill in the Circuit Court, but the Florida Supreme Court dismissed the writ of error because the Circuit Court lacked jurisdiction to try this offense. The crime was a misdemeanor, not a felony, and the Circuit Court's constitutional jurisdiction was limited to felonies.
The Circuit Court lacked original jurisdiction because assault with intent to kill is not punishable by State prison imprisonment and therefore constitutes a misdemeanor, not a felony. The Supreme Court's appellate jurisdiction is limited to criminal cases where the offense amounts to a felony, so the Court could neither affirm nor reverse the judgment.
“The offense charged in the indictment not being punishable by imprisonment in the State prison, is not a felony under the statute. The Circuit Court, therefore, had no original jurisdiction at the time of this trial, and the proceedings and judgment were void.”
The core holding that the Circuit Court lacked jurisdiction because the crime was a misdemeanor, not a felony.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceKennedy was indicted for assault with intent to kill under an 1832 statute, which prescribed punishment of a fine up to $1,000 or imprisonment not exc…
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 Felony Definition cases and more on FLexlaw
delivered the opinion of the court.
Plaintiff in error was indicted for an “ assault with intent to kill,’’'under an act of February. 10, 1832, (Thompson’s Dig., 490,) the punishment for which is’ prescribed to' be “ by a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars, or imprisonment., not.exceeding six.;months;,cat the;discretion:of the *636jury.” Accused was tried in April, 1875, and sentenced, upon conviction, to imprisonment in the State prison.
The statute of 1868, relating to crimes and punishment, provides that any crime punishable by death or imprisonment in the State prison is a felony, and every other offense is a misdemeanor.
The original jurisdiction of the Circuit Courts, as defined by the Constitution, (before the late amendments, which were adopted after the trial took place,) in criminal cases, was confined to the trial of felonies, (Section 8, Article VI,) and the appellate jurisdiction to the trial of misdemeanors upon appeal from the county court.
The offense charged in the indictment not being punishable by imprisonment in the State prison, is not a felony unr der the statute. The Circuit Court, therefore, had no original jurisdiction at the time of this trial, and the proceedings'and judgment were void.
The Constitution gives the Supreme Court appellate jurisdiction in “criminal cases in which the offense charged amounts to felony.” (Section 5, Article VI.) The jurisdiction being thus - confined, we can,neither affirm nor reverse the judgment, and the writ of eiTor must be dismissed. •(Suttton vs. The State, 13 Fla., 670.)
The offensé: here charged is not included in the provisions of Section 46, Chapter 3, of “ an act to provide for the punishment,of crime and proceedings jn criminal cases,” approved August 6, 1868. :
"Writ of error dismissed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Newton Lummus v. The Florida-Adirondack Sch., Inc., 123 Fla. 810 (Fla. 1934)…from ad valorem taxation, which accounts for the inclusion of the provisions of Sec. 16 of Art. XVI in the Constitution as amended in 1875 and now carried as Sec. 16 of Article XVI of the Constitution of 1885. See Atlantic & Gulf R. R. Co. v. Allen, 15 Fla. 635. It will be observed that under the provisions of the Constitution of 1868 the exemptions were based upon the purpose for which the corporation existed while the amendment of 1875. based the exemption upon the purpose for which the property was hel…
-
Calloway Brown v. State, 232 So. 2d 55 (Fla. 4th DCA 1970)…be imprisonment in the county jail (a misdemeanor). The majority then assumes the legislature could not have intended this. Actually, the legislature only enacted that which our State Supreme Court had already determined. In Kennedy v. State, 1876, 15 Fla. 635, it was stated: “Plaintiff * * * was indicted for an ‘assault with intent to kill’ * * * the punishment for which is prescribed to be ‘by a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars, or imprisonment not exceeding six months, at the discretion of the…
Authorities Cited
- Sutton v. State, 13 Fla. 670 (Fla. 1869)