M. A. ROSIN
v.
T. M. ANDERSON, AS SHERIFF OF DESOTO COUNTY, 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 court held that the information failed to charge any offense against the accused, thus entitling him to discharge.
Relator was held under a capias based on an information charging solicitation and receipt of money for a candidate in a primary election. The informat…
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 Capias cases and more on FLexlaw
Writ of habeas corpus was issued by this Court on February 19, 1945, returnable instanter.
The petition and return show that relator is held under a capias issued pursuant to an information filed in the Circuit Court of the Twelfth Judicial Circuit of Florida in and for DeSoto County, in the following language:
“In the Name and By the Authority of the State of Florida:
“Clyde H. Wilson, State Attorney of the Twelfth Judicial Circuit prosecuting for the State of Florida in the County of DeSoto, under oath information makes that M. A. Rosin, late of the County of DeSoto and State of Florida, on the 4th day of May in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and forty four in the County and State aforesaid did unlawfully solicit and request money to be used in Arcadia, Nocatee, and other places in DeSoto County, Florida, prior to that certain primary election held in said county on the 23rd day of May 1944, for Ed Albritton, the said Ed Albritton being then and there a candidate for. office in the .aforesaid primary election, contrary to the statute in such case made and provided and against the peace and dignity of the State of Florida.
*675• Second Count.
“Clyde H. Wilson, State Attorney, of the Twelfth Judicial Circuit under oath information makes that M. A. Rosin, late of the County of DeSoto and State of Florida, on the 4th day of May, in the year of our Lord, one thousand nine hundred and forty four in the County and State aforesaid, did unlawfully solicit and request money under the pretense of the same being used to proceure the votes of persons unknown to the State Attorney for Ed Albritton in that certain primary election held in said county on the 23rd day of May A. D. 1944, the said Ed Albritton being then and there a candidate for office in the aforesaid primary election, contrary to the statute in such’ case made and provided and against the peace and dignity of the State of Florida.
Third Count.
“Clyde H. Wilson, State Attorney of the Twelfth Judicial Circuit prosecuting for the State of Florida in the County of DeSoto, under oath information makes that M. A. Rosin, late of the County of DeSoto and State of Florida, on the 4th day of May in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and forty four in the County and State aforesaid did unlawfully receive money to be used in Arcadia, Nocatee and .other places in DeSoto County, Florida, prior to that certain primary election held in said county on the 23rd day of May, 1944, for "Ed Albritton, the said Ed Albritton being then and there a candidate for office in the aforesaid primary election, contrary to the statute in such case made and provided and against the peace and dignity bf the State of Florida.
Fourth Count.
Clyde H. Wilson, State Attorney, of the Twelfth Judicial Circuit, under oath information makes that M. A. Rosin, late of the County of DeSoto and State of Florida, on the 4th day of May in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and forty four in the County and State aforesaid, did unlawfuly receive money under the pretense of the same being used to procure the votes of persons unknown to the State Attorney for Ed Albritton in that certain primary election held in said county on the 23rd day of May, A. D. 1944, the said Ed Albritton being then and there a candidate for *676office in the aforesaid primary election, contrary to the statute in such case made and provided and.against the peace and dignity of the State of Florida.”
The information and each count thereof entirely fails to charge any offense against the accused. See Colson v. State, 70 Fla. 267, 71 So. 277; also see State v. Meysenberg, 171 Mo. 1, 71 S.W. Rep. 229, and 1 Archb. Crim. Prac. & Pleading, page 275, Sec. 88, wherein it is said:
“It has already been mentioned that the indictment must state all the facts and circumstances comprised in the definition of the offense, by the rule of the common law or statute on which the indictment is founded. And these must be stated with clearness and certainty, otherwise the indictment will be had.
“The principal rule, as to the certainty required in an indictment may, I think, be correctly laid down thus: that where the definition of an offense whether by a rule of the common law or by statute, includes generic terms (as it necessarily must) it is not sufficient that the indictment should charge the offense in the same generic terms as in the definition, but it must state the species — it must descend to particulars.”
The information entirely fails to advise the accused as to what charge he is required to defend against.
Therefore, the petitioner is discharged.
So ordered.
CHAPMAN, C. J„ TERRELL and ADAMS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (15 total)
-
Price v. State, 995 So. 2d 401 (Fla. 2008)…L.Ed. 278 (1937). For an information to sufficiently charge a crime it must follow the statute, clearly charge each of the essential elements, and sufficiently advise the accused of the specific crime with which he is charged. See Rosin v. Anderson, 155 Fla. 673, 21 So. 2d 143, 144 (1945). Generally the test for granting relief based on a defect in the information is actual prejudice to the fairness of the trial. See Gray, 435 So. 2d at 818 (citing Lackos v. State, 339 So. 2d 217 (Fla.1976)). Price contend…
-
State v. Bruno, 107 So. 2d 9 (Fla. 1958)…F.S.A., the term “connected” is generic and the information, in merely using that term, did not sufficiently inform him of what he was charged. He says that the accusatory statement should have been specific. This Court, in Rosin v. Anderson, 1945, 155 Fla. 673, 21 So. 2d 143, stated that when a definition of an offense includes a generic term it is not sufficient that the indictment should charge the offense in the same generic term, but it must state the species — it must descend to particulars. In the…
-
State v. Beasley, 317 So. 2d 750 (Fla. 1975)…nformation as drawn is clearly inadequate. See Rules of Criminal Procedure 3.140(b) and 3.-140(d)(1), and Florida Criminal Rules and Practice at 53 (The Florida Bar CLE 1974); Kittleson v. State, 152 Fla. 242, 9 So. 2d 807 (1942); Rosin v. Anderson, 155 Fla. 673, 21 So. 2d 143 (1945); Russell v. United States, 369 U.S. 749, 82 S.Ct. 1038, 8 L.Ed.2d 240 (1962). We reverse the holding of the trial judge that the statute is facially unconsti [*754] tutional. We affirm the dismissal of the information on the g…
Previewing 3 of 15 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Colson v. State, 71 Fla. 267 (Fla. 1916)