DIXON
v.
MAYO

Fla. | 1953-04-07
ROBERTS, C. J., 'and THOMAS, HOBSON and DREW, JT., concur.
64 So. 2d 176 Florida Supreme Court (1953) Positive Treatment
Cited by 6 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

This cause came on to be heard upon the original writ of habeas corpus and the respondent’s return. It now appears to the court that the petitioner was not entitled to the writ because his period of incarceration had not expired due to the provisions of the sentence that thirty days be added to the original period in the event he did not pay the costs, and his failure to pay the same.

ROBERTS, C. J., 'and THOMAS, HOBSON and DREW, JT., concur.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Adjmi v. State, 139 So. 2d 179 (Fla. 3d DCA 1962)
    …rida, 1939). The effect of this statute was to authorize a sentence for default in payment of a fine. This authorization, in effect, enlarged the legal sentence in each case where an imprisonment and fine are authorized. Cf. Dixon v. Mayo, Fla.1953, 64 So. 2d 176, and Williams v. State, 158 Fla. 415, 28 So. 2d 691. Having examined each point relied upon by the appellants for reversal we hold that the judgment and sentence as to Joseph Adjmi, Charles Adjmi and Albert George is affirmed. As to the defendant E…
  • Schreck v. State, 240 So. 2d 873 (Fla. 4th DCA 1970)
    …of which there would be added an additional one year of imprisonment. Unquestionably, under the authorities of F.S. 811.021(2), F.S.A., F.S. 775.06, F.S.A., F.S. 921.14, F.S.A., Adjmi v. State, Fla.App.1962, 139 So. 2d 179; Dixon v. Mayo, Fla.1953, 64 So. 2d 176; Williams v. State, 1947, 158 Fla. 415, 28 So. 2d 691, the court had the authority to impose this sentence which, in effect, enlarged the legal sentence. While this appeal was pending the Supreme Court of the United States rendered an opinion on Ju…
  • General Lee Gary v. State, 239 So. 2d 523 (Fla. 4th DCA 1970)
    …time the trial court had the authority to impose upon appellant, even though indigent, a period of confinement beyond the maximum term specified by statute in the event of appellant’s failure to satisfy the payment of costs. Dixon v. Mayo, Fla.1953, 64 So. 2d 176; Williams v. State, 1947, 158 Fla. 415, 28 So. 2d 691. However, while this appeal was pending the Supreme Court of the United States on June 29, 1970, filed its opinion in the case of Williams v. State of Illinois, 399 U.S. 235, 90 S.Ct. 2018, 26 L.…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw