JOHN NOWLING
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA
Appellant was tried and convicted on an information charging him with unlawfully concealing one gallon of moonshine whiskey on which the tax was imposed by the Beverage Act of Florida, thereby in*585tending to defraud the State of Florida of such tax. He was sentenced to three years in the State penitentiary.
We do not think the information was sufficient, in that it does not allege that the tax had not been paid. We think the punishment imposed in view of the offense charged was contrary to Section Eight, Declaration of Rights, and some of the evidence should not have been admitted. For these reasons the judgment is reversed.
Reversed.
BROWN, C. J., TERRELL, CHAPMAN and THOMAS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Brown v. State, 152 Fla. 853 (Fla. 1943)…the judgment and sentence for the term of four years in the State prison for the offense charged violate Section 8 of the Declaration of Rights of the Constitution of Florida ?” Appellant relies with confidence on the case of John Nowling v. State, 151 Fla. 584, 10 So. (2nd) 130, and the case of Aired v. State of Fla., 151 Fla. 586, 10 So. (2nd) 131. We have examined the transcripts of records in these two cases and find that the informations filed in those cases were in all respects, except as to names an…
-
La Barbera v. State, 63 So. 2d 654 (Fla. 1953)…hat it was disproportionate to the appellant’s just desserts. This question has long since been answered contrary to appellant’s contention, but it may be wise to refer to three of our decisions on the subject. It is true that in Nowling v. State, 151 Fla. 584, 10 So. 2d 130, the then Division •B of this court apparently invoked the Declaration of Rights, Section 8, where a defendant was sentenced to three years for concealing a gallon of “moonshine” with intent to defraud the state of the tax. The writer…
-
Stanford v. State, 110 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 1959)…discretion with the trial court and that the appellate court is powerless to disturb the judgment so entered. State v. Davis, 88 S.C. 229, 70 S.E. 811, 34 L.R.A.,N.S., 295; Annotation: 29 A.L.R. 321; Annotation: 89 A.L.R. 299. In Nowling v. State, 151 Fla. 584, 10 So. 2d 130, we approved the rule that an appellate court had the power to reduce an excessive sentence. Later, in Brown v. State, 152 Fla. 853, 13 So. 2d 458, we appear to have receded from the doctrine of the Nowling case and held that the only…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence