HARRY SITAMORE
v.
NATHAN MAYO, AS STATE PRISON CUSTODIAN, AND L. F. CHAPMAN, AS SUPERINTENDENT OF THE STATE PRISON AT RAIFORD, 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.
Harry Sitamore challenged his imprisonment by habeas corpus or equity petition, alleging fraud in the procurement of his judgments and sentences. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the circuit court's judgment remanding Sitamore to custody, finding sufficient evidence supported the lower court's decision and that coram nobis relief was unavailable.
The court affirmed the circuit court's remand of Sitamore to custody on the merits. The court held that coram nobis proceedings were not available under the facts presented, as they did not meet the general principles governing the granting of such writs of error established in Lamb v. State and subsequent cases.
“while some members of the Court were in some doubt as to whether habeas corpus, or a bill in equity to impeach the judgments and sentences under which appellant is held in custody, for fraud in their procurement, was the appropriate remedy for appellant to have pursued in this case”
Identifies the procedural question of which remedy was appropriate for challenging judgments allegedly procured by fraud.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceSitamore was held in custody under judgments and sentences at the State Prison at Raiford, Florida. He petitioned for relief alleging fraud in the pro…
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 Writ Of Error Coram Nobis cases and more on FLexlaw
The judgment of the circuit court, remanding the appellant to custody, is Affirmed.
BUFORD, C. J., BROWN, THOMAS and SEBRING, JJ., concur.
In response to appellant’s petition for clarification of our judgment in this case, for the information of appellant and his counsel we might state that, while some members of the Court were in some doubt as to whether habeas corpus, or a bill in equity to impeach the judgments and sentences under which appellant is held in custody, for fraud in their procurement, was the appropriate remedy for appellant to have pursued in this case (See Skipper v. Schumacher, 124 Fla. 384, *161169 So. 58), the court, in rendering its judgment of affirmance, considered and decided the appeal on the merits. The testimony on the vital issues presented was in conflict, but there being in our opinion ample evidence to support the judgment entered by the circuit judge, who was in a better position than the members of this Court to determine the credibility of the testimony, we entered a judgment of affirmance, in accordance with our established rule governing such cases.
In so far as the petition in an informal way, asks leave of this Court to apply to the trial court for writ of error Coram Nobis, the petition must be denied. Our view is that such coram nobis proceedings are not available on the facts shown by this record, under the general principles governing the granting of sfich writs of error as set forth in Lamb v. State, 91 Fla. 396, 107 So. 535, and subsequent cases following that case. See also in this general connection Jarvis v. State, 115 Fla. 320, 156 So. 310.
BUFORD, C. J., BROWN, THOMAS and SEBRING, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Shuler v. State, 161 So. 2d 3 (Fla. 1964)…ion for a Writ of Habeas Corpus is dismissed. It is so ordered. DREW, C. J., and THOMAS, THOR-NAL, O’CONNELL, CALDWELL and HOBSON (Ret.), JJ., concur. . See Townsend v. Sain, 372 U.S. 293, 83 S.Ct. 745, 9 L.Ed.2d 770. . Sitamore v. Mayo, et al., 154 Fla. 160, 17 So. 2d 78.…
Authorities Cited
- Lamb v. State, 91 Fla. 396 (Fla. 1926)
- Skipper v. Doyle Schumacher, 124 Fla. 384 (Fla. 1936)
- Jarvis v. State, 115 Fla. 320 (Fla. 1934)