THEODORE WARREN, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
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.
Theodore Warren was convicted of a second offense against Florida's beverage laws and sentenced to the state penitentiary. The Florida Supreme Court reversed his conviction because the trial court improperly admitted evidence of his prior conviction without presenting the complete record of that prior judgment.
A trial court commits reversible error by accepting a certified copy of a prior judgment and testimony regarding it without presenting the whole record of the prior conviction, which must include the information, plea, jurisdiction, verdict, and judgment and sentence.
“The allegation in the [information] that the defendant had been theretofore convicted of a like offense was a necessary element in the crime with which he was charged. The whole record of .the first judgment of conviction should have been offered.”
Establishes that when prior conviction is an element of the offense, the entire record must be presented
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceWarren was tried and convicted of a second beverage law offense under Section 562.451, Florida Statutes 1951. To prove the prior conviction element, t…
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.
SEBRING, Justice.
Theodore Warren was informed against for a second offense against the beverage laws. Section 562.451, Florida Statutes 1951, F.S.A. He was tried and found guilty and sentenced to the state penitentiary. He has appealed from the judgment and sentence.
In an effort to prove that the defendant had been convicted of an offense against the beverage laws prior to the time of the alleged commission of the offense which formed the basis for the information for which the defendant was on trial, the trial court received in evidence, over the objection of the defendant, a certified copy of a judgment rendered in a prior proceeding in the County Judge’s Court of Madison County, Florida. The trial court also, allowed the County Judge of Madison County to testify, over seasonable objection by the defendant, that he had presided at the former trial of the defendant and that the judgment entered in the County Judge’s Court had never been reversed but was in full force and effect..
It is established by the decisions that the reception of such evidence constitutes reversible error. As is held in Norwood v. State, 80 Fla. 613, 86 So. 506, 508, in respect to a certified copy of a judgment of a prior conviction rendered in the County Judge’s Court, “The allegation in the [information] that the defendant had been theretofore convicted of a like offense was a necessary element in the crime with which he was charged. The whole record of .the first judgment of conviction should have been offered.” (Emphasis supplied.) By the term “whole record”' of the conviction and sentence is meant the record proper, “meaning the record of those elements necessary to show the existence of a, valid judgment in law without the aid of any presumptions of regularity and correctness;” that is to say, the information, the plea of the accused, the jurisdiction of the court, the verdict of the jury, and .the judgment and sentence of the court. These are the essential elements of the record proper. See Jarvis v. Chapman, 118 Fla. 577, 159 So. 282, 160 So. 366.
The judgment appealed from should be reversed.
It is so' ordered.
TERRELL, Acting Chief Justice, HOB-SON, J., and PATTERSON, Associate Justice, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Vazquez v. State, 405 So. 2d 177 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)…unless the individual charged is an ex-felon. His prior conviction is a substantive element of the crime charged.”); Ferguson v. State, 379 So. 2d 163, 165 (Fla.3d DCA 1980); State v. Dixon 193 So. 2d 62 (Fla. 2d DCA 1967); see also Warren v. State, 74 So. 2d 688 (Fla. 1954); Sparkman v. State Prison Custodian, 154 Fla. 688, 18 So. 2d 772 (1944); Clinton v. State, 143 Fla. 356, 196 So. 684 (1940); Coulson v. State, 110 Fla. 279, 149 So. 521 (1933); Timmons v. State, 97 Fla. 23, 119 So. 393 (1929); Ballard v.…
-
State v. Ellis Dixon, 193 So. 2d 62 (Fla. 2d DCA 1966)…mons v. State, 1929, 97 Fla. 23, 119 So. 393; Coulson v. State, 1933, 110 Fla. 281, 149 So. 522; Clinton v. State, 1940, 143 Fla. 356, 196 So. 684; Sparkman v. State Prison Custodian, 1944, 154 Fla. 688, 18 So. 2d 772; and Warren v. State, Fla.1954, 74 So. 2d 688. And such proof might be more than merely perfunctory; it might involve serious considerations, such as that which would seemingly exist in the case sub judice. The U.S. Supreme Court in Reynolds v. Cochran, 365 U.S. 525, 81 S.Ct. 723, 5 L.Ed.2d 75…
-
Dowling v. State, 210 So. 2d 280 (Fla. 2d DCA 1968)…antial proof that the appellant and the Nathaniel Dowling shown in the proper court records introduced into evidence was the same person. The elements necessary to prove a prior conviction by a proper record as set down in Warren v. State, Fla.1954, 74 So. 2d 688, were present in the instant case. The essential elements being the information, the plea of the accused, the jurisdiction of the court, the verdict of the jury, and the judgment and sentence of the court. We, therefore, must and do affirm the judg…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Columbus Norwood v. State, 80 Fla. 613 (Fla. 1920)
- Jarvis v. Chapman, 118 Fla. 577 (Fla. 1934)
- DeWitt E. Taylor v. The Toledo Tr. Co., 119 Fla. 90 (Fla. 1934)