Hysler v. State
| Decision Date | 14 April 1941 |
| Citation | 146 Fla. 593,1 So.2d 628 |
| Parties | HYSLER v. STATE. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
P. Guy Crews, of Jacksonville, for plaintiff in error.
George Couper Gibbs, Atty. Gen., and Nathan Cockrell, Asst. Atty Gen., for defendant in error.
On motion for rehearing on application for an order for leave to apply to the Circuit Court of Duval County for a writ of error coram nobis to review the judgment of conviction of petitioner of the offense of Murder in the First Degree heretofore entered in that Court, on grounds stated in the petition, we have denied the petition for reasons as follows:
(a) This Court may take judicial cognizance of its own records and the record lodged in this Court on the writ of error to the judgment of conviction of the petitioner shows ample evidence to support the judgment of conviction without the aid of the testimony given on that trial by the witness James Baker.
(b) Writ of error coram nobis will not lie because of false testimony given at the trial by important witness. Lamb v. State, 91 Fla. 396, 107 So. 535.
(c) Matters properly presentable for writ of coram nobis are such as would have prevented conviction and not such as may have caused a different result. Chesser v. State, 92 Fla 754, 109 So. 906.
(d) If witness Baker swore falsely at defendant's trial, that fact was known to petitioner at the time of the trial. Washington v. State, 95 Fla. 289, 116 So. 470; Pike v State, 103 Fla. 594, 139 So. 196.
(e) The allegations of the petition do not show that the prosecuting attorney had any guilty knowledge of the alleged maltreatment of the witness, or that the alleged falsity of the testimony of the witness Baker was known to the prosecuting officer.
(f) The petition does not show that any alleged mal-treatment of witness was inflicted by any officer of the trial court or that same was known to any officer of the trial court.
(g) The records of this Court, of which we take judicial cognizance, show that petitioner was convicted on trial held subsequent to the trial and conviction of the witness Baker of the offense of Murder in the first degree without recommendation to mercy, and that both trials were conducted on behalf of each defendant by able, diligent and faithful counsel.
(h) If all petitioner alleges in his petition had been true and had been fully made known to the trial court and to the jury which tried the defendant-petitioner, it...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Woodard v. State
...against Allen v. State, 42 Ala.App. 9, 150 So.2d 399.2 His opinion adopts 'from the Florida Court' a procedure based on Hysler v. State, 146 Fla. 593, 1 So.2d 628. In Shepard's Citator, Lamb v. State, 91 Fla. 396, 107 So. 535, has twelve Alabama references, by far the most numerous outside ......
-
Hysler v. State of Florida
...electric chair' by the district attorney. After twice considering the matter, the Supreme Court of Florida denied the application. 146 Fla. 593, 1 So.2d 628. We brought the case here, 313 U.S. 557, 61 S.Ct. 1113, 85 L.Ed. 1518, in view of our solicitude, especially where life is at stake, f......
-
Larimore v. State
...not that such facts might have produced a different result had they been known to judge and jury. Lamb v. State, supra; Hysler v. State, 146 Fla. 593, 1 So.2d 628; Sullivan v. State, Fla. , 18 So.2d 163 Id. As we consider whether this case presents issues of a fundamental nature compelling ......
-
Taylor v. State of Alabama
...244 Ala. 391, 394, 13 So.2d 683, 686, as follows: 'We recognize in this State, as does the Supreme Court of Florida (Hysler v. State, 146 Fla. 593, 1 So.2d 628), that the common law writ of error coram nobis is available * * * and is the appropriate remedy to be followed. See 24 C.J.S., Cri......