THE STATE OF FLORIDA, PETITIONER,
v.
HONORABLE HERBERT STETTIN, JUDGE OF THE CIRCUIT COURT, ELEVENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA, RESPONDENT
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.
Florida's highest court held that a circuit court lacks jurisdiction to issue a writ of error coram nobis because such writs are only available in the original trial court. The State successfully sought prohibition to prevent the circuit court from entertaining a defendant's coram nobis petition filed three years after his guilty plea in county court.
A circuit court lacks jurisdiction to entertain a petition for writ of error coram nobis because coram nobis is only available in the original trial court. Only the County Court of Dade, as the original trial court, would have the power to issue such a writ.
[1] A circuit court, not being the original trial court, lacks jurisdiction to entertain a petition for a writ of error coram nobis.
[2] County courts vested with jurisdiction over misdemeanor crimes may issue writs necessary to the exercise of their criminal jurisdiction.
Previewing 2 of 2 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“Coram nobis originated at common law as a writ available in the original trial court.”
Establishes the foundational principle that coram nobis writs are exclusively available in the original trial court
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceCarl J. Germaine pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge in Dade County Court in 1975 and paid the imposed fine. In 1978, Germaine filed a petition for…
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 Common Law Writs cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The defendant, Carl J. Germaine, pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge in the Dade County Court in 1975 and was sentenced to pay a fine, which was paid. In 1978 he filed a petition for a writ of error coram nobis in the Circuit Court of the Eleventh Judicial Circuit and the circuit court entered a rule nisi directed to the State. Thereafter, the State sought a writ of prohibition in this court, contending that the circuit court, not being the original trial court, could not issue a writ of coram nobis. We issued a rule nisi in prohibition and upon a return consider the cause on the merits.
We find that the County Court of Dade is a constitutional court given jurisdiction over misdemeanor crimes, pursuant to Article V, Section 7, Florida Constitution, and Sections 34.01 and 900.03,1 Florida Statutes (1977).
Coram nobis originated at common law as a writ available in the original trial court. Lamb v. State, 91 Fla. 396, 107 So. 535 (1926); Leavitt v. State, 116 Fla. 738, 156 So. 904 (1934); House v. State, 130 Fla. 400, 177 So. 705 (1938); Russ v. State, 95 So. 2d 594 (Fla.1957). We hold that the circuit court, not being the original trial court, was without jurisdiction to entertain the petition for writ of error coram nobis. It appears, by the wording of Section 900.-03, Florida Statutes (1977), that the County Court of Dade has the power to issue writs necessary to the exercise of its criminal jurisdiction.
Therefore, if it becomes necessary, we will make the rule nisi in prohibition, heretofore issued by this court, absolute.
. “Courts vested with criminal jurisdiction; process.
“(1) Original jurisdiction in criminal cases is vested in the circuit courts and county courts.
“(2) Courts having criminal jurisdiction may issue writs and process necessary to the exercise of the criminal jurisdiction and the writs and process shall have effect through the state.”
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Busch v. State, 466 So. 2d 1075 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)…tate, 383 So. 2d 1159 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980). We note that where no appeal has been sought a petition for writ of error coram nobis is made to the same court in which the judgment was entered. State v. Woods, 400 So. 2d 456 (Fla.1981); State v. Stettin, 364 So. 2d 95 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978). The alleged newly discovered evidence which Busch urged below as a basis for post-conviction relief included the recantation made by Schoolcraft after trial in the form of a sworn statement. In considering whether the trial cour…
-
State v. Woods, 400 So. 2d 456 (Fla. 1981)…udgment was entered. Russ v. State, 95 So. 2d 594, 597 (Fla.1957); House v. State, 130 Fla. 400, 177 So. 705, 706 (1938); Leavitt v. State, 116 Fla. 738, 156 So. 904, 905 (1934); Lamb v. State, 91 Fla. 396, 107 So. 535, 537 (1926); State v. Stettin, 364 So. 2d 95, 96 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978). The function of the writ was to correct errors of fact, not errors of law; and the general rule repeatedly employed by this Court to establish the sufficiency of an application for a writ of error coram nobis is that the alle…1 / 3
-
Kuznik v. State, 604 So. 2d 37 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992)…k’s appeal on its merits. Petition granted. RYDER, A.C.J., and PARKER and PATTERSON, JJ., concur. . Unlike the other "extraordinary writs,” coram nobis may be filed in county court if that is where the judgment arose originally. State v. Stettin, 364 So. 2d 95 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978). We express no opinion as to the merits of Kuznik’s petition or his subsequent appeal. . The record does not support any suggestion that the second motion was an abuse of the rules. Cf. Blanton v. State, 561 So. 2d 587 (Fla. 2d D…
Authorities Cited
- Lamb v. State, 91 Fla. 396 (Fla. 1926)
- Russ v. State, 95 So. 2d 594 (Fla. 1957)
- House v. State, 130 Fla. 400 (Fla. 1937)
- Jules Leavitt v. State, 116 Fla. 738 (Fla. 1934)