NORMAN MCQUAGGE AND DOCK SAPP
v.
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.
The Florida Supreme Court remanded a case to the trial court to determine if the information filed was properly verified under oath before the trial, allowing for correction of the record if necessary.
The court held that the record should be remanded to the trial court to determine the factual issue of whether the information was properly verified.
“this cause is before us on motion of the State to remand the record for correction in the Circuit Court of Washington County and it appears that the disposition of the cause depends upon a matter of fact, viz.: whether or not the information filed in the cause and under which petitioner was tried and convicted, was actually verified under oath prior to the trial.”
This quote explains the reason for the court's consideration of the case and the central factual issue.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe State moved to remand the record for correction, raising a factual issue: whether the information under which the petitioner was tried and convict…
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.
This cause is before us on motion of the State to remand the record for correction in the Circuit Court of Washington County and it appears that the disposition of the cause depends upon a matter of fact, viz.: whether or not the information filed in the cause and under which petitioner was tried and convicted, was actually verified under oath prior to the trial.
Therefore, on consideration of said motion, the transcript of the record is remanded to the trial court with directions to said trial court, after notice to C. M. Cox, attorney for appellants and opportunity by him to be heard and to adduce legal evidence as to the issue to correct the record, if correction be warranted, to make the record reflect the truth and otherwise permit the record to stand as it now is: and, there*80upon, to return the transcript of the record to this Court with the certificate of the trial court as to verity of the record as so returned.
So ordered.
BUFORD, C. J., BROWN, THOMAS and SEBRING, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (18 total)
-
Kalmutz v. Kalmutz, 299 So. 2d 30 (Fla. 4th DCA 1974)…ter acts as an agent of the chancellor, and what he does in the capacity is in effect done by the court. These recommendations should be set aside only upon good cause, even though the findings were, as we held in Burns v. Burns, supra, 153 Fla. 73, 13 So. 2d 599, advisory. Federal Equity Practice, Street, Vol. 2, page 910. “In fine, we have the view that where, as in this case, a competent master is selected by the chancellor and attentively conducts the hearings, thoroughly digests the testimony of the wi…
-
Martin v. Martin, 102 So. 2d 837 (Fla. 2d DCA 1958)…ean a course of behavior by one spouse toward the other such as to imperil the mental and physical health of the other to the extent that maintaining and continuing the marriage relationship is rendered unbearable. Burns v. Burns, 1943, 153 Fla. 73, 13 So. 2d 599. Furthermore, no divorce will be granted on the ground of extreme cruelty where there is no actual physical violence unless the behavior complained of [*839] results in injuries to health or causes cohabitation to be intolerable and unsafe, or unles…
-
DeHART v. DeHART, 360 So. 2d 1285 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978)…course, which she should soon complete. Recognizing these factors, the trial court may choose to take additional testimony as to the present need and ability of the parties in order to fashion an equitable judgment. See Burns v. Burns, 153 Fla. 73, 13 So. 2d 599 (1943). Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. HOBSON, Acting C. J., and GRIMES, J., concur. . Of course, husband’s payments for mortgage reduction, taxes, and ins…
Previewing 3 of 18 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence